Why Do We Let Gvmt Define Our Marriages?

Question

Clearly the First Amendment gives us the right to form associations freely from gvmt interference. Marriage is a very specific association between two people.

Everyone's marriage is going to be as different as the individuals themselves. So why do we let the gvmt define marriage only one way? Clearly this definition is not successful as it has a 50% failure rate.

Since no one can define marriage for someone else, why do we give the politicians the ability to put the majority view in as the law of the land?

And this isn't a Christian/Gay, Liberal/Conservative issue since the most liberal states in the country like California and New York ban gay marriage, Massachusetts is in the process of voting to overturn the courts, and New Jersey and Vermont provide a second class status of "civil unions".

Shouldn't we just get the gvmt out of the marriage business?

Your answers are interesting and prove my point. Many people believe that marriage is religious. For them they are right, but why push your views on others who disagree? No one should force you to accept any persons marriage. I know many people who don't accept a couple as married unless they get married in a church.

But what difference does it make if you vow to share your life in front of the pope or standing naked in front of a tree in an old growth forest?

And yes, the 1st amendment does give us the right to free associations.

And then there are those who can't seem to live life properly unless they get the approval of the gvmt first. I feel sorry for this group the most.

Does gvmt give some benefits to those they approve of? Sure. Privatize Social Security and put in the flat or fair tax to make all things equal.

And the majority should never be able to vote on what the minority should do. That’s the antithesis of the freedom that is this country.

Answer 1

I don't agree with the government being involved, but it is a Christian issue, because it is vows that were taken before the witness that God recognizes, not whatever the government has to say about it. So regardless of what the government has to say about it, or whether or not you can find a church to marry you regardless of the fundamendalists beliefs in it, God isn't going to recognize anything else anyway. So the real question is why you're getting married, and if it is for religious/spiritual reasons or just for whatever benefits the government has allowed married couples to have.

The lgbt, from what we're to believe, are more interested in the benefits they're recieve from the marriage, than whatever sacrament the marriage itself represents, so their real issue is with the government, not the Christians, who most likely aren't going to recognize nor respect that marriage to begin with. This is just a natural progression of their attempts to win rights over the years to begin with, against the prejudice and persecution they've faced, which was never right in the first place, regardless of what God says about it. Christians do not have to accept or agree with homosexuality, but it doesn't give them the right to mistreat anyone. If gay marriage is the end of the world, it's because the society isn't upholding the traditions and norms of marriage between heterosexual couples, which isn't necessarily a function of persecution against the church, but symptomatic of where they're at these days; it is up to the church to provide an example to the society of what is so great about marriage, not up to the society to make it easier for people to stay married. It was easier in the past to uphold marriage because there was a clear advantage, monetarily, to marriage, but any more that institution is crumbling because that economic advantage is no longer there. Some of this started back with social welfare 50 years ago, and newer technologies that advocated sexual autonomy, as opposed to encouraging individuals to find fulfillment in traditional relationships. It is a very, very complex issue to which there are no clear answers, and I doubt that the government is truly in tune with what people are thinking anyway. Christians have their work cut out for them, as far as their own issues with each other, but they're only going to be successful with preventing the courts from allowing the lgbt to be married but for so long, if the government can find a way to allow it to happen in a way that it is their best interests they will, it's just too controversial now to take a serious stand on it and not in anyone's best interests to allow it to happen ...

Answer 2

it's really a good idea to keep gvmt involvement in personal lives as small as possible. can't quite agree with your first amendment interpretation, but i wonder why anyone thinks that marriage is the penultimate act of a couple. it's a legal contract, nothing more. and, the majority view is the law of the land. no matter where you live or in what time frame.

Answer 3

Because, like it or not, it is the STATE (government) that adminsters and gives the rights that go with marriage, such as adoption, inheritance and taxation. So we must have the STATE stop its blatent discrimination and allow same-sex marriage to enjoy the same rights.

I agree that the emotional content that two people bring to a marriage are of utmost importance. However, we also need the legal rights to be in place.

So I am agreeing with you, that the STATE should not discriminate, and that religion should have no say in what rights the STATE gives to all its citizens.

Answer 4

Its because they are scared to think that if they let Gay/lesbians to marry, why not let us also get married to animals.
Its not the same thing. We are human beings, its different.
They are opposed to it because its "religion" baced. Their law states that a "Marriage should be between one man and One woman."
Thing of it is. I don't understand that if its so religious and so ungodly, why is it that we don't have the pledge of allegance in schools anymore? Why don't we have it where we can say "God"? Not everyone believes in God so it was taken out. If we can do that, whats the point with what it says in the bible as being between a man and a woman? So therefore if we are going to drop God altogether, we might as well, just let women marry women and men marry men. Point End.

Answer 5

But it is a christian thing,that's the sole reason.
This country may have started because of religious persecution but that is exactly what goes on in this country,down to who can marry who.
I completely disagree with the laws they have about it,every one has a right to lose half their stuff when a relationship fails.

Answer 6

Some churches can, and do, perform Same Sex Marriages (Metropolitan Community Church, for example), that are recognized by the community, and God -- but don' t carry any legal recognition for the purposes of Govt. taxes or benefits. I would agree... this is wrong...

Answer 7

the govt should but only because its a church matter and none of their business

marriage is a sacrament after all

what they should do is create a recognised alternative that gives all the same rights etc etc though just not use the word marriage as it upsets the religious folk

to be honest thats where the trouble is ~ the word marriage

Answer 8

the government OR the church should not be able 2 define ANYONE'S marriage. that is between the ppl who r 2 b married and NOT anyone else.

Answer 9

Marriage is only good for the actual rights. **** the church.

Answer 10

The USSC needs to be involved in this, and until such time that they do all we can do is continue to lobby and pursuade our elected officials towards our position.