Marriage-a political or religious institution

Confused · Post by **Confused** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 10:19 am

I was watching the new this morning (on MTV so bare with me) when it was announced that New Jersey would no longer ban same sex marriages. As I sat there watching all the religious groups picketing outside the courthouse it got me wondering. What is it that religious groups oppose with same sex marriage. Now before you go ballistic, hear me out. The current Brittanica definition of marriage includes the following:

Main Entry: mar·riage
Pronunciation: 'mer-ij, 'ma-rij
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English mariage, from Anglo-French, from marier to marry
1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage> b : the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2 : an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3 : an intimate or close union <the marriage of painting and poetry -- J. T. Shawcross

Nowhere in this definition is their any mention of a religious rite. No religious leader is required to perform a marriage (a judge can) and no religous leader is required to negate a marriage. However, for a marriage to be legal, paperwork must be filed with the state. Therby negating the separation of church and state if the religious grounds for denying same sex marriage are based on religious reasons.

So my question for debate:

1) Do you oppose gay marriage because the term marriage is used and you consider that a religious term?

2) After your marriage, did you not file the proper forms for it to be recognized legally, thereby negating it being a religious union only.

3) Do you not feel that having to file papers with the state after the ceremony negates separation of church and state?

Jacurutu · Post by **Jacurutu** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 4:25 pm

As a side question, whatever happened to the golden rule? How would you like a bunch of people outside of your house protesting your marriage? (actually, that would be pretty funny)

Confused · Post by **Confused** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 5:26 pm

Jacurutu wrote:As a side question, whatever happened to the golden rule? How would you like a bunch of people outside of your house protesting your marriage? (actually, that would be pretty funny)

I guess I am not familiar with the golden rule. So it would be?

Jacurutu · Post by **Jacurutu** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 5:52 pm

The golden rule: Do unto others as you would have done unto you.

It's a fairly basic maxim, which was expanded by Kant in the "Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals" to essentially mean "let moral code for behavior apply universally to all people." Immorality is acting in a way such that the world cannot function if EVERYONE acts that way. For example, lying is prohibited by deontology because if everyone in the world were to lie, the world could not function. The same goes for murder, theft, rape, etc. In this debate, I would apply the rule "Let a person marry whomever they please, so long as that person is a consenting adult." Therefore, I support gay marriage because to deny it would be immoral.

micatala · Post by **micatala** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:16 pm

1) Do you oppose gay marriage because the term marriage is used and you consider that a religious term?

I don't oppose gay marriage.

2) After your marriage, did you not file the proper forms for it to be recognized legally, thereby negating it being a religious union only.

Yes I did, after being married in a Lutheran church. I will also note that divorces are typically handled without churches being involved at all. I view restrictions on marriage for gay people as a civil rights problem, essentially in imposition of religion on people of other faiths or no faith.

3) Do you not feel that having to file papers with the state after the ceremony negates separation of church and state?

THe problem is that marriage for many people is both a religious rite including a solemn vow before God and man, as well as a civil institution. THis is a result of it arising within history in many cultures where their was no separation of church and state, where in fact the church and the state were essentially one and the same.

Confused · Post by **Confused** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 8:28 am

micatala wrote:
1) Do you oppose gay marriage because the term marriage is used and you consider that a religious term?
I don't oppose gay marriage.

2) After your marriage, did you not file the proper forms for it to be recognized legally, thereby negating it being a religious union only.
Yes I did, after being married in a Lutheran church. I will also note that divorces are typically handled without churches being involved at all. I view restrictions on marriage for gay people as a civil rights problem, essentially in imposition of religion on people of other faiths or no faith.

3) Do you not feel that having to file papers with the state after the ceremony negates separation of church and state?
THe problem is that marriage for many people is both a religious rite including a solemn vow before God and man, as well as a civil institution. THis is a result of it arising within history in many cultures where their was no separation of church and state, where in fact the church and the state were essentially one and the same.

You are a light amongst much darkness. I don't know one Christian in this area who doens't oppose gay marriage. Impressive.

micatala · Post by **micatala** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 4:19 pm

COnfused wrote: You are a light amongst much darkness. I don't know one Christian in this area who doens't oppose gay marriage. Impressive.

Thank you. Some would say I am showing 'darkness' by taking this viewpoint, so it is gratifying to be told I am a light.

In our area, many are vocal in their opposition to gay marriage. We have a an amendment to ban gay marriage as well as any alternative (civil unions, etc.) on the ballot, and I have seen no 'vote no' signs and lots of vote yes. However, although it is probably fair to say many who are not opponents of gay marriage are 'keeping their heads down', I have spoken with a number of Christians who will be voting no. I believe the Methodist Church has actually taken an official position against the amendment.

As of last August, 49% in a SD poll said they would vote no. Perhaps there is hope, although all the money and organization will be on the 'Yes' side. Some have also said the wording of the poll question might have contributed to the high No percentage.

Confused · Post by **Confused** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 5:54 pm

micatala wrote:
COnfused wrote: You are a light amongst much darkness. I don't know one Christian in this area who doens't oppose gay marriage. Impressive.
Thank you. Some would say I am showing 'darkness' by taking this viewpoint, so it is gratifying to be told I am a light.

In our area, many are vocal in their opposition to gay marriage. We have a an amendment to ban gay marriage as well as any alternative (civil unions, etc.) on the ballot, and I have seen no 'vote no' signs and lots of vote yes. However, although it is probably fair to say many who are not opponents of gay marriage are 'keeping their heads down', I have spoken with a number of Christians who will be voting no. I believe the Methodist Church has actually taken an official position against the amendment.

As of last August, 49% in a SD poll said they would vote no. Perhaps there is hope, although all the money and organization will be on the 'Yes' side. Some have also said the wording of the poll question might have contributed to the high No percentage.

I applaud your honesty and openness with 50 tokens.

Arbela · Post by **Arbela** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 6:48 pm

When asked why gay marriage was so threatening, one woman told me it would surely lead to polygamy. And that once we have polygamy, all hell will break loose.

Just to humor her, I looked it up and found there is a small segment of the population that would like to see polygamy legal. However I highly doubt gay marriage would open that door.

methylatedghosts · Post by **methylatedghosts** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:43 pm

Arbela wrote:When asked why gay marriage was so threatening, one woman told me it would surely lead to polygamy. And that once we have polygamy, all hell will break loose.

Just to humor her, I looked it up and found there is a small segment of the population that would like to see polygamy legal. However I highly doubt gay marriage would open that door.

huh? How would it do that? So confused.....