To Fix Gay Dilemma, Government Should Quit the Marriage Business

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

The decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court declaring that gays have a constitutional right to marry could become a powerful wedge issue in American politics. There is, however, a way to avoid that.

Those who oppose gay marriage believe deeply that marriage is sacreda divine, a blessed sacrament between man and woman as ordained in the Bible. If they are right, then the entire concept of marriage has no place in our civil society, which recognizes the separation between the sacred and the secular, between church and state.

The state is, of course, concerned with the secular rights and responsibilities that are currently associated with the sacrament of marriage: the financial consequences of divorce, the custody of children, Social Security and hospital benefits, etc.

The solution is to unlink the religious institution of marriage — as distinguished from the secular institution of civil union — from the state. Under this proposal, any couple could register for civil union, recognized by the state, with all its rights and responsibilities.

Religious couples could then go to the church, synagogue, mosque or other sacred institution of their choice in order to be married. These religious institutions would have total decision-making authority over which marriages to recognize. Catholic churches would not recognize gay marriages. Orthodox Jewish synagogues would not recognize a marriage between a Jew and a non-Jew who did not wish to convert to Judaism. And those religious institutions that chose to recognize gay marriages could do so. It would be entirely a religious decision beyond the scope of the state.


LA TImes, free registration

I like this idea. Frankly there a NON gay people co-habitating even as roommates for years that should have certain opportunities germane to marriage.

[ewagner]

1. I almost agree

there are public interests in the area of health and protection of property and off-spring but I think with a little creativity those issues could be handled without government being involved.

[The Backlash Cometh]

2. Disagree totally.

Sounds like something a Libertarian would come up with.

If gay rights have a chance at all, it will be through the government. Certainly don't expect to receive 100% approval from the churches.

[mmm]

3. I disagree

I believe those heterosexuals foolish enough to undertake the burden of marriage and children should receive more support from the system
than all others.

[Occulus]

5. They shouldn't get a DIME.

Marriage, and children, are both lifestyle choices.

If they want that fight, I'll be the first to bring it to them.

Being gay is a "lifestyle choice"- I hear that one all the time. Well, guess what, breeder fuckwits? Your marriage and your children were "lifestyle choices" too, so don't expect me to feel good about forking over my tax money to reqard your "choice".

No one held you down on your wife or husband and cried "impregnate thyself or I shall SMOTE you!"

No one ever forced that ring onto your finger.

WTF? Either we reward "lifestyle choices" or we do NOT- and if being attracted to teh same sex is a "lifestyle choice", well, so are marriage and childbearing.

The "lifestyle choice" argument for keeping gays from getting married DOES NOT FLY.

Period.

[Emoto]

4. Right on

The government has no business deciding which consenting adult can love which other consenting adult in a committed relationship. Nor should there be classes of relationships offering differing legal/tax rights. A hetero couple who choose not to have children should not be penalized for that decision, and should have the same "marriage" rights as any other couple, including gay couples, nor should those who choose to breed be rewarded financially.

[gttim]

6. Some Church's will marry same sex couples.

And there is nothing the government can do about it.

Married people with children get other advantages, other than legal ones. How many people have coworkers who frequently leave early because of their kids, or have to take extra time off because of them. How many times have people without kids been asked to pick up their slack?

[Davis_X_Machina]

7. This two-track system....

...is common -- anthough not universal -- in Europe.

Two weddings: first to the city hall for a civil marriage, then to a church, mosque or whatever.

It's the last word in the separation of church and state, and I'm surprised that some of them have it and we, with our constitutional tradition, don't.

Catholic churches would not recognize gay marriages. As is their right -- but a church's failure to recognize a marriage under this proposal wouldn't affect a couple's rights or ability to adopt, inherit, own jointly, etc. etc. since those would be conferred by the civil marriage.

I married a Jew without first getting a dispensation from the local Catholic bishop, and as a result the Church considers me not to be really married -- technically my wife and I are in a state of concubinage.

I still file taxes as 'married, filing jointly' and my kids are legitimate, etc. because the State of Maine thinks we're married, regardless of the opinion of the Diocesan chancery.