Thursday, December 04, 2008

More On Gay Marriage


There is so much emotional and religious baggage associated with the word "marriage".

The religious right likes to harp on the idea that The Bible defines marriage as the sacred union between "one man and one woman". I defy anyone to find a passage from the Old Testament or a "quote" from Jesus that makes this distinction.

Let me save you some time. There aren't any.

There are some scattered references in the latter books of the New Testament that weigh in on the subject of marriage. But the Old Testament Jehovah and the New Testament Jesus never mention the subject.

In fact, the patriarch of monotheism, Abram/Abraham, the source of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, built his fortune pimping out his wife to various wealthy landed men in exchange for real estate, only to later expose the fraud, keep the land, and move on to the next sucker.

He was a con man who treatd his wife like a whore for his own profit! This was who Yahweh picked as "his main guy". His "chosen one". Was that a marriage between "one man and one woman"?

I seem to recall other Old Testament patriarchs having multiple wives, concubines and slaves with whom they had offspring. Were those arrangements marriages between "one man and one woman"?

Christians like to point out that the arrival and crucifixion of Jesus was like a renegotiation of the contract between God and man.

O.K., fine. Find me one quote...just one...anywhere in the New Testament, where Jesus himself defines the terms of marriage. He doesn't. There aren't any.

We need to separate legal rights from sacred sanction without creating 2nd class citizens.

Marriage, as an institution, is not defined by religious text. It is defined by legal text and precedent.

THE XO PLAN

States should define "marriage" as a secular, legal, bonding between two consenting, unrelated (outside of a defined parameter) adults that endows both parties with all of the traditional and legal privileges of any other marriage sanctioned by the state.

It should be a marriage. Not a civil union, but an actual marriage in the eyes and nomenclature of the state and just as binding by state and federal law as any other marriage. The defining certification is made by a civil official.

A separate ceremony, call it a Sacred Marriage or Eternal Bonding...whatever, may at the discretion of a religious institution be performed. It should carry all of the same legal weight and privileges as a civil ceremony. Religious institutions are completely free to make their own determinations based on their own scriptures and dogma as to what sort of unions they will grant their blessings. This determination may not, under any circumstances, be usurped by any government.

The secular laws determine what constitutes a marriage in legal terms and, by federal law, must be recognized and respected in all states. These laws must include both civil and sacred ceremonies.

The individual religious communities are free to define what they consider to be a valid marriage according to their standards and may impose whatever restrictions (giving communion, baptism, excommunication, etc.) as they see fit.

A couple may choose to have just a civil marriage, just a religious marriage, or both.

But they would all be equally binding marriages under state and federal law and they would all have the exact same benefits and privileges to both parties.

When it comes to determining rights in a court of law, it wouldn't matter if they had a secular marriage, a religous marriage, or both. All would be equal in the eyes of the law.

How could this possibly hurt or pose a threat to anyone?

7 comments:

Logtar said...

Fear,

I think fear is what makes those arguments stick. Fear that the gays will take your kids, Fear that the gays will change something about how you live your life, Fear that someone else doing something different than you can be just as happy and that you are not the only one that has life figured out.

Ringbearer said...

www.civillywedd.com says "well stated position/solution on Gay Marriage".
It is fear of the unknown that has to be overcome by those not informed enough to react to LGBT Marriage. There is hope.

SmedRock said...

Are you trying to tell us something XO? First, cats, and now this?

I jest. Well thought out, and I have to agree. Religion has set back parts of this society generations. The above posters are correct. It is fear, I fear.

Joe said...

I don't see what the big deal is about gay marriage either and it should be legal. I voted against Prop 8 here in California and am disappointed it passed.

I Travel for JOOLS said...

I can argue this subject, but there are far more pressing problems in this world. There is genocide going on as we stand by. It's unthinkable. We sit in our warm houses, well fed, while real people, children, are being slaughtered. I myself admit I have done nothing to pressure congress to do something and I sure haven't done anything worth any merit at all. Sometimes I just shake my head and try to get a grip on what is really important.

Joshua said...

It's not religious, it's societal. Society just happens to be steeped in religious backgrounds, and many religious fools use religion in their arguments.
However, societies for many centuries have defined their own marriage traditions (religious or not) as being between a man and a woman. Of course there have been instances where polygamy was accepted, but modern society as a whole (EG much greater than 50%) has decided that polygamy is wrong. Why did they do that? What makes that any different than gay marriage, so long as all parties are consenting? For that matter, who draws the line and says you can't marry non-human entities, and in doing so grant those entities "rights" they previously had before? Society makes that determination. That is why the majority is who get's to decide how laws should be enforced. We can all have our own opinions. But it is the combination of those opinions at the voting booth that makes a freedom loving democratic society great.

This "Gay Marriage is a basic human right" concept makes me sick because it is steeped in favoring the opinion of one minority group over the majority.

My personal opinion is that society is losing respect for marriage. That lack of commitment in marriage raises very selfish and irresponsible children, who then degrade our society into socialistic tendencies of class warfare and entitlement power struggles.

How does that opinion fit with your "fear mongering" claims?

Anonymous said...

Jesus quotes on marriage?

You said there aren't any?

Yes there are.

Matthew 19:4.


Anti Atheist Club Member.