Do you agree that Marriage is a Religous institution between a man and a woman?

Question

as has been stated here countless times?

what if someone were to create a religion that stated marriage was between any two consenting individuals?

or do we only recognize the definition given by certain religions such as christianity? isn't this endorsing a state religion?

Answer 1

Strictly up to the couple having the ceremony performed

Answer 2

There are two forms of 'marriage'. The religious and the civil form. All marriages have a civil element and this is a legal contract, currently between a man and a woman. This contract, like all contracts, is signed and filed with the local authorities. It is this contract that has to be desolved through the courts when two people get divorced. It is the CIVIL marriage that is specifically between a man and a woman.

The religious form of marriage does not require the involvment of the government and can be entered into and disolved through what ever rules and customs are associated with the religion of those involved be they christian, hindu, buddist or muslim. There are christian ministers that will perform the marriage ceremony for homosexuals and heterosexuals. 'Gay Marriage' is not 'illegal' from a religous perspective, but ONLY from a civil perspective. And yet, it's those of faith that keep getting the bad rap.

Personally, I've never understood why anyone would ever involve the government in any personal relationship. Unless children and their security is involved, the government can kiss my butt. I'll get a minister and we'll get married. THAT is marriage, not some government stamp of approval.

However, in my opinion, marriage is and should be between a man and a woman only. I don't feel strongly about this, but what's the difference between 'gay marriage' and my being married to my father or my labrador. I love both and am commited to both. You want gay marriage? Fine. How do you define marriage. It's either wide open and everyone can marry anyone or anything or it's between a man and a woman.

Answer 3

Marriage at one point was a religious thing and has evolved over the centuries. Today most modern governments rules are based on what was good for society in general and have nothing to do with religious ceremony.

Marriage is a commitment by two people to be together and raise children and it can be performed by a mayor, judge, minister, priest, a rabbi, a ship captain, or anyone who was given power by the state. I guess that more than 1/3 of the marriages have nothing to do with religion and more to do with love.

Your question seems to be geared to why don't we offer gay / homosexual marriage? Is society in general ready to accept this? The answer so far has been no. Its been put to a vote in numerous states as constitutional amendments and it has failed miserably.

The only state that I know of that allows gay marriage is MA and this is because a rogue judge delared it unconstitutional. Where in the constitution does it say that homosexuals can be married? This is not a decision based on the laws of a particular state, but by someone's individual agenda. Most laws say that men and women can be married.

Should marriage between a horse and a woman be legal? What about a man and sheep? Some people practice these things. Why isn't it legal?

What someone does in the bedroom should not dictate the laws of our society. You are trying to make an argument that it should.

Answer 4

There ARE religions which say that marriage is an institution between any two consenting adults.

Unitarians*, the United Church of Christ are but two religions which advocate full marriage equity for all. Presbyterians are currently split over the issue as are Episcopals and both are moving towards full advocacy of marriage equity.

So the religious argument against marriage is indeed an advocacy of a particular religious view by government which is strictly forbidden by the first amendment.

*And before anyone starts saying that these are fringe religions, remember that 3 of the first 6 presidents of the United States were Unitarians. Episcopals and Presbyterians are the heart of traditional American religious tradition.

Answer 5

Marriage is not JUST a religious institution. It is also a legal union between a man and a woman. Obviously, even un-religious people can get married.

"What if someone were to create a religion that stated marriage was between any two consenting individuals?"

Great. But so what?

"Or do we only recognize the definition given by certain religions such as Christianity?"

We recognize unions according to laws which are made by elected legislatures. Most legislatures happen to have mostly Christians in them.

"Isn't this endorsing a state religion?"

No. Maybe some liberals think that way, and maybe they think that way because of some sloppy writing by the Surpeme Court. But I don't see it as "endorsement."

Answer 6

Marriage always has been between a man and a woman (of course in some cultures between a boy and a girl like King Tut), Period. Marriage between a man and a woman is the crux of the family and it has been for mellenia, in every single culture, nation, state and religion and non-religion, so I do not understand the homosexual movement to change this. I think that they are not satisfied with being homosexual, they have to push the envelope to see how far it can go. Besides, if the statistics are to be believed then marriage is on it's way out anyway, right?

Answer 7

Marriage is a secular institution that enjoins two estates into one.

No....it is not an endorsement of state religion if we allow only man 2 woman marriage.

Do the people have a governing interest in regulating the corporations? If yes, then they have an interest in regulating the state of marriage, because that is what marriage is.

It is not the position of the courts to dictate the will of the people. Convince 51% of the representatives of our republic, and convince the president to sign the legislation, and achieve Gay marriage through the Legislature, as that branch creates laws for regulation of corporations.

Marraige is not a religious institution. it is a secular institution.

Answer 8

Marriage is a religious institution (it's a covenant with God to love each other forever) but I do NOT believe that any good relgion actually STATES that it's meant to be between only couples in which one is male and one is female. That was ADDED by people when the birth rate was EXTREMELY LOW and the more 'babies' that were made, the better life got. The 'gender' of a marrying couple is actually a 'civil' requirement in the U.S. (separation of church and state is in effect here) ...
I don't think we need a 'new' religion so that gays can marry ... I don't believe that we need a 'state religion' (ANY religion!) to prevent gays and lesbians from marrying ...
A 'marriage' takes place whenever two people 'fall in love' and start making love and living together. The 'wedding' is only the CELEBRATION of that union, but it also 'legalizes' the union in the 'courts of law in the land.' I think that most gays and lesbians I know would be perfectly HAPPY to be able to have a 'non-legal wedding' if they could do that in a church, but they also WANT the same 'legal benefits' of a marriage, such as rights of inheritance and the right to be able to visit with and to make the 'health decisions' for their partners if the partner is not able to make those for themselves. I think it is CRIMINAL that they CAN NOT do this, but 'family' who may have TOTALLY REJECTED the 'sick person' because of the 'sexuality' of that person are then 'welcomed' to make 'decisions' they are not as well informed about, because they truly DO NOT KNOW the person who could be dying. This can happen in heterosexual cases, too, sometimes ... but it is still CRIMINAL as far as I am concerned.

Answer 9

I believe marriage should be among two people who truly love each other and not just for the sole purpose of getting something from the other. Such as health benefits,etc.

Answer 10

no. all religion is recognized by government.. it has to meet certain specified criteria though.. religions such as christianity and islam have been established faiths for many many years... and in those religions, marriage is only recognized as a union between a man and woman. no religion that i'm aware of that is established recognizes unions between "individuals".. you can't just ask for holiday pay from work because your "religion" says that on the third friday of march you have to sit in front of a tree and sing kum-by-ya.. not exactly about marriage.. but, same principle.

and i'm not saying that two people of the same sex shouldn't be allowed to get married.. i'm all for it.. whatever floats your boat.. but, what i am opposed to is if those kind of unions get you the same benefits of marriage as a union between 2 of the opposite sex... i'm sorry, it's not right... and the laws reflect (or should reflect), the will of the people.. so, the government has every right to impose such laws because we permit it... it's called voting.

Answer 11

if it is only a religious institution then it would be up to the religion who can marry. It is also a state institution, or else why the need for marriage licenses and tax codes geared toward marriage. There are many both state and commercial benefits that marriage brings