Shouldn't people be married in the eyes of their creator, and not in the eyes of the state? Separation of Church and State should leave marriages to be between the couple and God, not the Couple, God and the government.
2006-12-09 16:14:44 · 19 answers · asked by Joe B 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Oh, so you're suggesting that atheists are no longer allowed to marry? That the church will handle all the separation and child custody issues when a couple decides to divorce? That the tax advantages of marriage be eliminated? That immigration laws relating to marriage have no bearing any longer? That inheritance laws giving spouses preference are not worth keeping? That the "next of kin" designation of spouse in hospital emergency rooms have no relevance in a marriage?
Interesting sort of solution to the problem. Oddly, no church or minister has to marry anyone they choose not to marry. No one. In no state of the union. So already, if your church doesn't want to marry a couple, no one anywhere can make you do so.
2006-12-09 16:36:47 · answer #1 · answered by NHBaritone 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Interesting idea, I never looked at it that way before but consider: What if a person's religion says a man can have up to 15 wives? A person could also get married and divorced 100 times a year if they wanted to. If a couple get married, have kids, the guy abandons the home, wife, and kids...who enforces alimony payments and things like that? There would never be such a thing as tax cuts for having dependents. Depending on what religion a person adheres to, maybe the "god" of THEIR religion is a sort of "anything goes" god and they would have real chaos on their hands..
2006-12-10 00:28:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are right and wrong. God's Will is that a man and a woman are to be married, nothing else. So you see you could never be legitimately married to a member of the same sex in God's eyesight. It is an abomination before Him. I don't mean to hurt anyone's feeling but the Word of God is just what it is. We cannot add or take away from it.At the time that law was written in the USA, our forefathers sided with Him. May God Bless
2006-12-10 00:20:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, but they should make divorce less costly. When I was living in China, I found that to get married there costs 150(chinese money) and consent of the goverment. To get divorced, it took but a day in front of a government officer(police), and a small fee.
Then again, America's views are different, religion wise and such.
If America happend to be less open to the idea of God ordianing our marriages(don't get me wrong), how much easier would it be to 'get in and out of it'?
Being married in the U.S. entitles you to a status change, making you eligible to pay more taxes. God takes the upper half but the rest goes to the government.
2006-12-10 00:25:26 · answer #4 · answered by Shokur 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't go to "church" but would love it if marriages were placed on a contracted time limit like 2 years for your first term and you could then renew for 5 or 10 years pending an independent report from a Dr. or Psychiatrist... that way you wouldn't have to pay so much to fix a mistake.
Like one made in Vegas!!!!
2006-12-10 00:17:19 · answer #5 · answered by aljo 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with the libertarian ideal of no state marriages, but that is a HUGE REFORM. It also makes it tricky for couples traveling to other countries with legal marriages (ie, almost all countries).
So I think the best thing to do at least at the moment is legalize gay marriage.
2006-12-10 00:16:35 · answer #6 · answered by STFU Dude 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I could kind of go with that. If you want to be married go with the religious - or non-religious - ceremony of your choice.
Or have all legal unions be civil unions - just papers filed - and then the couple can go to a church or wherever and have a ceremony if they wish.
2006-12-10 00:53:14 · answer #7 · answered by Sage Bluestorm 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, but there goes that tax revenue for the greed of government. Just recently in my town, it was voted in favor of- for the town to tax churches to get more revenue. So, thereis a big step in the wrong direction.
2006-12-10 00:20:28 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
mar rage is designed for raising children. I think you should both have to pay the state child support if you get divorced while you have children and they will provide with your money what the children need . no more using children for income if the marriage doesn't work out.
2006-12-10 00:21:02 · answer #9 · answered by setter505 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've slowly been coming to that position. Why do I need a contract with the government to tell me I'm married?
2006-12-10 00:17:07 · answer #10 · answered by MithrilHawk 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋