Should Atheists be allowed to get married?

Question

Isn't marriage supposed to be a covenant with God? Why is it legal here? I believe if you aren't married by the church then it's not a real marriage.

Answer 1

no should not

Answer 2

I wasn't married in a church, I don't care if anyone aside from the government recognizes it as a real marriage.
If you want to recognize marriage as only a religious ceremony then fine. Marriage should no longer be recognized by the government, if you want all the rights that are now given to married couples you will have to have a civil union performed by a government official. Then same sex couples can also be given the rights to a union and with religion taken out of it nobody could complain since that is the major argument against it.

Answer 3

Read your history. Even as early as the mid-1600's the colony of New Haven which became the state of Connecticut handed over the duty of marriage to the magistrates because it would "show less stain on God's House". So it has been a legal entity for a very long time and only within the past hundred years has marriage become more "religious" again.

Answer 4

this was sent to me in an email, i think i want to share this with all the close-minded christains out there.


New Thoughts on Letting Fringe Groups Marry
Turning the tables...

I am completely in favor of allowing Christians to get married, and I think that trying to prevent it is unjust and a mistake.

Christianity is not a disease. Christians, even though they are disliked or mistrusted by many, are normal people and should have the same rights as everyone else, as if they were, let's say, homosexuals or computer programmers.

I am aware of the fact that many traits in the behavior of Christians, such as their attitudes towards sex, many seem strange to the rest of us. I also know that some of their traditions, like the public exhibition of images of tortured people, may make some people feel uncomfortable.

But all this, besides being an image transmitted by the media rather than the reality, is not a reason to prevent their marriage. Some could argue that Christian marriage is not real marriage, because to them, it is a ritual, and a covenant with their god, instead of a contract for the union of two people. Also, since sex outside marriage is condemned by Christianity, some could say that allowing Christians to marry would encourage marriages in order to avoid shame in their communities or simply because they wish to have sex (forbidden to them outside a marriage), increasing domestic violence and dysfunctional families. But we have to remember that this is not exclusive of Christian families and that, since we cannot know the thoughts of others, we should not judge their intimate motivations.

On the other hand, to say that their unions are not true marriage and that therefore they should be given some other name is just a mean, petty technique to lead the debate towards semantic questions that are beside the point. Even among Christians, marriage is marriage and a family is a family.

And with this I will go on to another very controversial subject that I hope does not seem too radical: I am also in favor of allowing Christians to adopt children. Some people might be outraged by my affirmation. A few are likely to reply, "Christians adopting!? Those kids could become Christians!"

I see that type of criticism and my answer is this: even though the children of Christians have a much higher likelihood of becoming Christians also (contrary to what happens to the children of homosexuals or computer programmers), I have already made clear that I believe Christians to be human beings like everybody else.

Despite the opinions of some and the hints that we have, there is no conclusive evidence that Christian parents are less well equipped to raise a child, or that the religiously biased atmosphere of a Christian home is a negative influence of a child. Besides, adoption offices judge each case individually so it should be up to these to determine whether a pair of parents is the right one or not.

In short, in spite of what some people think, I believe that Christians should have the right to get married and to adopt children. Just like homosexuals, or computer programmers.


By [e-mail]

Answer 5

Yes, they should. Not everyone shares your faith, they should not be forced to meet your religion's standards. Marriage existed before Christ, it will exist as long as it meet social needs, regardless of religious changes. Even the Communists, who thought that religion was evil, did not attempt to prevent people from getting married, because they recognized that it performs a valuable social function.

Marriage is a legal contract between two people. This is why, when one spouse dies, the other automatically receives all the deceased's worldly goods. This is why any children they may have will be given into the surviving spouse's custody - even if they are not biologically related to the survivor. The right to enter into a marriage contract is a basic right, one that even convicted criminals are not stripped of. You may feel it invalid all you like, your church can agree with you, but that does not change the legal realities.

Answer 6

I don't want to marry, because it is just one more symptom of totalitarian control organized religion has over us. It is so insidious to demand that a man and a woman make a "covenant with God" before they are allowed to indulge natural sexual desires. I don't need any priest telling me what I can or cannot do with women (or in other areas). If atheists want to marry, there are civil ceremonies. Who are you to deny that such marriages are real? You are nothing at all!

Answer 7

A true pastor would not marry atheists. Of course, if they decided to get married in a church, that would be the biggest hypocritical statement they could make.

Them getting married by the courts is perfectly acceptable.

Either way, God does not recognize their marriage as a promise before Him so it doesn't matter.

Answer 8

Marriage is a covenant with God to YOU.

Not all people view marriage this way.

My wife and I were married in a religious ceremony, and that was the way we wanted it. We see our marriage, and raising children, as an extension of who we are as people, and as a way to express the love God has blessed us with.

But...everyone is different. I would rather an atheist get married; then their spouses can yell at them too when they spend too much time at Yahoo Answers!!

peace

Answer 9

This a two way street. For the christian it is a covenant with God. For, Atheists or actually anyone not a christian, it provides for common ownership of possessions. This way, if, a spouse die the survivor would have legal custody of the Home and TV etc. without a will. This how understand it.

Answer 10

It has never been said that Marriage is a privilage to only those who worship God/Jesus Christ. Marriage is a unity of two soul, who have chosen to travel the path of life as one (basically). You obviously have the understanding that all marriages must be in a churh under God, this by far not the case. Forms of marriage throughout history pre-date chrisitanity, and therefor the bible.....as do many of our celebrations. Perhaps a little research outside of the bible would assit to open you mind.

I hope this is helpful and in no way disrespectful.

Answer 11

I agree that marriage is a religious rite and should be decided upon by each individual religious institution. I do not think that the government of the US should be in the business of regulating who may or may not go through this religious rite. It should also not offer any benefits or penalties depending upon whether one chooses to go through the religious rite of marriage. Religious rites are a very personal thing and I do not feel that the government should base it's tax rates and benefits upon whether or not one chooses to go through a religious rite.

I feel that the government's place is to oversee civil unions of those who wish to legally join their financial assets. I feel that any persons should be able to join their financial assets as they choose and not be discriminated against due to their race, gender, or religion (or lack of religion). The government should have the authority to decide to give benefits or penalize those who chose to have a civil union, but these decisions should be made for all those who have a civil union agreement rather than discriminate based upon race, gender or religion.