|
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
I read your whole post...but really it stops here, doesn't it?
Until a marriage license is issued by the state, it's only a "marriage" in the eyes of those involved. If you get married in the Church and don't get a license, it's NOT a legal marriage.
So long as marriage is also a legal status, the Church has no business preventing gays from marrying (civil marriage).
The argument you seem to be putting forth, and many (myself included) would support it, is for a separate legal term for civil marriage FOR ALL PEOPLE, not just gays. Let the Church keep marriage as a sacrament...but then ALL civil "marriages" would be termed something else (unions, for eg). What can't be done is to have civil marriage remain "marriage" for hetero couples, but be "unions" for gay ones.
"Same, but different" doesn't cut it.
Imagine if immigrants seeking and qualifying for Canadian citizenship were told "well, you won't be called a "citizen", we're going to call you something else...but don't worry, it's the same thing". that wouldn't fly either.
what's worse here is that it's Christian morality that's at the root of this dispute... |
It depends on how you view 'Marriage'.
If one believes it's just a cut and dry thing with nothing to do with God then I can understand this arguement, however, it's not.
While there are destinct legal advantages for being 'married' that's not the reason I got marriaged at all but that's what this is all about.
To me (and LOT of other people) marriage is the combining of a man and woman before God.
Now before you go off on a rant on that point, I have NOTHING AGAINST GAYS WANTING TO BE TOGETHER so lets just cut that arguement out right here and now.
What I AM against is the redefining of the tradional word, 'marriage' to make it fit something that it clearly isn't.
I say, give them what they want, that's fine, but let's not let the courts/government decide what is clearly a church function.
If there needs to be clear definations then lets make some; hell I'm all for it.
But trying to fit square peg in a round hole is just making this thing worse.
It's a hyprocitical of liberals (not Liberals) to be telling the rest of us that the Church and State don't mix but then do a 180 telling us that the State has the right to redefine the Church.
___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."
|