OK, I have a new plan. Actually it is not mine. I heard about it last night on the radio while I was driving home.
The arguments in favor of defining marriage as between a man and a woman only are religious. They have tried to use other arguments, but the basic reasons are really religious only. The arguments against defining marriage as between a man and a woman are legal. They say that marriage is a legal contract and has nothing to do with religion.
I say, fine. Let marriage be religious. Give religions the right to use the word marriage. Define marriage as a religious right to be defined any way any religion chooses. Marriage then becomes something like baptism or communion. It conveys certain religious rights as defined by the specific religion only. There are no legal rights.
All legal rights are conveyed by a civil union. Current "legal" marriages become civil unions. If your church chooses to recognize your civil union as a marriage within their definition of marriage, fine. If not, take it up with your religion. The civil union gives everyone regardless of their sex, the legal rights that a married man and woman now have.
This solution separates the legal and religious aspects of marriage as currently defined. The religious people can have their marriage and they can define marriage any way they want. Who can get married is up to each religion.
If you want legal rights, you get a civil union. The civil union can also be a church marriage if the religion agrees. Otherwise it only carries legal rights and not religious rights also.
This will also allow people to get married in church and have religious rights of marriage but retain all their single rights from a legal point of view.
Some people might consider this as having your cake and eating it too.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I think that's a fabulous plan.
ReplyDeleteInteresting compromise, I'd like to see/hear it debated amongst all parties.
ReplyDeletesounds good to me
ReplyDeleteI have been saying the same thing since year 2000 It only makes sense in a senseless argument
ReplyDeletethat need not be. LGBT's, as well as anyone else wishing to wed should have that legal right. The Blessing of the Union comes from above, wheher in a religious ceremony or the practice of loving one another. Visit: http://www.civillywedd.com
Perfect... and some can do both.. :)...........very clear and define; and mature and guess what??
ReplyDeleteIt won't work; most people are not logical thinkers... lol...and like conflict and problems and trouble.. lol.
betty ann - You are right. It won't work. It won't work because the religion right (the ones really pushing to prevent gays from marrying) are not willing to settle for a solution that only gives them the right to choose for themselves. They want to make decisions for all of us also. It's about power and control. They want the power to control our lives and our decisions.
ReplyDelete