• Should Marriage be Regulated by State?
    10 replies, posted
I'm shit with words and I'm too lazy to type out any long essay, so instead I'm going to say a couple of things, show you a picture, say a few more things, then we're going to debate about it as efficiently as possible before it turns into a shit storm. What I want is for marriage and government to be separated. "Marriage", would become purely religious, where religion would dictate whether they would allow a gay marriage, monogamy, polygamy, etc. In place of legal marriage, would be an ownership system, in which people would file for the documents saying that they jointly own something. This would in no way imply any emotional relationship between the people. More than two people could file together for the same thing and of course same sex people could file together, since it doesn't imply that they're gay or anything. [img]http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/8962/envisionment.png[/img] What this would do, [list]Eliminate gay marriage debate due to government having no say in marriage.[/list] [list]Polygamy would be legalized due to government having no say in marriage.[/list] [list]Government doesn't interfere with religion, religion doesn't interfere with government, it's a win/win[/list] Here's an additional picture, [IMG]http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/2531/currentsystem.png[/IMG]
Amy and Ben should be allowed to get married!
Looking at your debate I would like to ask a couple of questions. I'm not really the best of readers, so please forgive me if my questions are a little silly or not well thought out. What if I'm an atheist that would like to get married? What if I want to immigrate to another country through marriage? I believe ownership and law plays a great deal in marriage in today's world. Currently I feel I can foresee heavy abuse with your system.
Marriage should obv. be regulated by state simply because it gives certain legal rights to couples that "domestic partnerships" do not. However, the religious part should not be regulated by state/does not matter. In its current state anyway.
kill all gays and mormons
[QUOTE=GreenDolphin;22805739]Looking at your debate I would like to ask a couple of question. What if I'm an atheist that would like to get married? What if I want to immigrate to another country through marriage?[/QUOTE] I guess you could make up another word for a government controlled type marriage.
[QUOTE=GreenDolphin;22805739]What if I'm an atheist that would like to get married?[/QUOTE] Why? I mean, I can see this happening because it's so embedded in our society, but think for a moment, what's the point in getting married? Now to actually answer your question, Atheist usually get married by getting a contract from the state which would be no different from this system except that it wouldn't be called marriage. If you're thinking of a wedding ceremony, that usually involves a priest, and if you're an Atheist, then I don't think you would be doing that. [quote=Perfumly]Marriage should obv. be regulated by state simply because it gives certain legal rights to couples that "domestic partnerships" do not.[/quote] Like what? I've we revised to this system, it would be no different than the legal part of our modern marriages.
The real truth is that religion cannot be allowed to have any power over those who don't subscribe to it. This isn't athiest spewing- if you think about it, it's perfectly logical and reasonable. That's the fundamental flaw I see with your system.
[QUOTE=Rubs10;22806192]Why? I mean, I can see this happening because it's so embedded in our society, but think for a moment, what's the point in getting married?[/quote] As Perfumly mentioned previously, certain legal rights. A major known example: What if I want to live with my spouse but we are both residents of a different country? Immigration to another country via marriage exists for this matter and is certainly beneficial. [QUOTE=Rubs10;22806192]Now to actually answer your question, Atheist usually get married by getting a contract from the state which would be no different from this system except that it wouldn't be called marriage.[/QUOTE] I'm not really getting what you are saying here. Again it might just be me and my poor reading skills right now. [QUOTE=Rubs10;22806192]If you're thinking of a wedding ceremony, that usually involves a priest, and if you're an Atheist, then I don't think you would be doing that.[/QUOTE] Marriage ceremonies, if wanted, can have no real connection or resemblance of any religious background or trait. If you have a marriage ceremony that isn't religious, then you don't need to have a priest. Instead you can hire a judge or a non-denominational minister to officiate a wedding, (this is applicable in the U.S). It's really up to what the couple want to have in their wedding ceremony. This includes whether it should be religious or not.
the fact that the government recognizes marriage (which is a religious institution) is simply an insult to the supposed secularism that our government and constitution uphold simply put, the government should recognize any sort of partnership (regardless of race, sex, creed, whatever) as a "civil union". if you want this civil union to be blessed by a rabbi or priest is up to you people need to realize that life is too fucking short to spend all your time denying other people happiness. these religious nutjobs who want to deny good, hardworking, loving gay couples the right to marry sickens me. i wish there was a hell for them to go to
The Government DOES regulate marriage. Why else do they tax it? (licenses)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.