Maybe marriage is a bad idea after all? What are the tangible benefits in the 'modern' world?
2006-09-15 12:56:49 · 9 answers · asked by larry n 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
We should not ban marriage but we should remove recognition of it by the states; thereby, removing all special rights that heterosexual couples receive by the states.
They can still have their sacred marriage in their churches... just not by the state.
2006-09-15 13:00:42 · answer #1 · answered by BeachBum 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Several hundred specific federal legal benefits, and most of a thousand specific state legal benefits (details vary by state).
So many laws are written, that it would be easier to make the partnership a defined legal status like "civil union" and make it legally distinct from any religious concept of marriage.
That way, people could form or dissolve civil unions under the law, and marriage can be left to the churches to do what they want.
2006-09-15 20:01:02 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No we should not ban marriage. Apart from the civil aspect of it, you would be infringing on religious aspects of it.
Benefits-- tax bene's, it is a legal structure for wealth, assets and a bunch of other things. It also formalizes the bond between two people.
2006-09-15 19:59:13 · answer #3 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Marriage is nothing more than a piece of paper that is the hardest thing to get out of...I will be with my significant other for life without another piece of paper. Besides, nobody stays married today anymore.
2006-09-15 20:37:20 · answer #4 · answered by Lipstick 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Marriage shows the image of the God.
Marriage is the image of the love of God within the Trinity; spouses also image the love between God and all humanity, made visible in the love of Christ and the Church. By virture of their baptisms, the marriage of Christains is a sacrament. That means it's a living sign that truly communicates and participates in the uniuon of Christ and the Church. The marriage vows lived out in the spouses' "one flesh" union constitute this living sign.
Paraphrasing St. Paul: For this reason a man will leave father and mother and cling to his bride, and the two shall become one flesh. This is a profound mystery, and it refers to Christ and the Church. Christ left his Father in heaven. He left the home of his mother on earth -- to give up his body for his Bride (Church), so that we might become "one flesh" with hime (Eucharist).
Since the "one flesh" communion of man and wife foreshadowed the Eucharistic communion of Christ and the Church right from the begginning, John Paul II speaks of marriage as the "primordial sacrament". Of all the ways that God chooses to reveal his life and love in the created world, JPII is saying, marriage - enacted and consummated by sexual union - is the most fundamental. Could God have made our sexuality any more important than this? Any more beautiful? Any more glorious? God gave us sexual desire itself to be the power to love as he loves, so that we could participate in divine life and fulfill the very meaning of our being and existence (within MARRIAGE)
Sounds great, you say, but it's a far cry fro the way sex plays itself out in the experience of real human beings. Yes, it is. The historic abuse of women at the hands of men; the tragedy of rape and other heinous sex crimes, even against children; AIDS and a host of other sexually transmitted disseases; unwed mothers; "Fatherless" childreen; abortion; adultery; skyrocketing divorce rates; prostitution; a multibilion-dollar pornography industry; the general cloud of shame and guilt that hangs over sexual matters - all of this paints a very differernt picture from the one St. Paul and John Paul II give us.
The picture it paints, in fact, is the tragedy of human sinfulness and our fall from God's intention for our sexuality "in the beginning." To ban marriage would be surrendering to the evil one.
2006-09-18 11:09:37 · answer #5 · answered by Giggly Giraffe 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What you would create is an irresponsible society for rearing children, loose of love and nuturing, concurrent to a complete breakdown of law and order with men forming harems and then needing to challenge other males for domination and additions to their harems, in short a return to caveman days and mimic animals.
2006-09-15 20:03:55 · answer #6 · answered by Frank 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We should give them a chance 2 marry
2006-09-19 11:00:19 · answer #7 · answered by Totally 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
From Mr. Federer's list of "You know you're a liberal if, ......"
".... you think marriage is passe, for everyone except homosexuals in which case you think it is long overdue."
2006-09-15 20:08:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
freedom of choice is paramount here. Marriage is a public statement by a couple that they are partners in all aspects of live, liberty and happiness. let it be and live and let live.
2006-09-15 20:03:35 · answer #9 · answered by ews99999 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋