Here’s a great letter on the Marriage Amendment.Question: If, as they say, marriage is at its heart a religious institution, then isn’t regulating of marriage a regulation of religion? Don’t the Unitarians have the religious right to marry gay people if their religion deems it appropriate? Can the government also tell the Jews when to give a Bar Mitsvah?Anyway, here’s a great letter from Kevin.
The proposed Federal Marriage Amendment – recently approved in a closed door session of the Senate Judiciary Commity – is a flagrant disregard of The Constitution and is, at the very least, more wrongdoing at the highest levels of Government.Altering our nations founding documents to endorse discrimination is the antithesis of our American Heritage; a heritage that includes tolerance.As the definitive source of protection for our freedoms and individual rights, TheConstitution is clear on making laws “respecting an establishment of religion, orprohibiting the free exercise thereof…? and ?The enumeration in the Constitution, ofcertain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.?The addition of this proposed Federal Marriage Amendment will do both, establish religious bigotry as law and ?deny and disparage other rights retained by the people.? People have a right to love who they choose to love. By denying people the basic right to love, cherish and have a family, no matter how that family is structured, the American people will be saying that discrimination and bigotry is our creed.I appeal to each and every one of you to please do your part to prevent religious follyfrom becoming black-letter law in the United States. Tell everyone you meet on the street and all your friends.For more information: http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/marriage/25602prs20060518.html
“There should be no such thing as a ‘marriage license….except insofar as civil marriages are concerned. ” It’s interesting because I don’t find that statement the opposite of what I was saying at all. Civil marriage as opposed to religious. People being able to choose both, but only the civil being considered legal. That’s really all I was saying.
I have to say though, I do find it disingenuous when people say that they don’t “believe” in or don’t find any value in a legal license for marriage. Because I don’t believe they hold it true for any other valuable in their life. Would you have a home with no lease or mortgage? What about a car? Or how about no record to show that the child they gave birth to is theirs? I think all of a sudden things like laws, licenses and records don’t seem to arbitrary then. In our society, marriage is what gives two partners the authority to make the intimate and intricate decisions that families need to be able to make for themselves and each other. We have laws to protect, regulate and validate. I have no problem with that.
finally a comment that makes a little sense. gay people should be allowed to marry regardless of thier religion. the truth about gay marriages is that they are banned because of prejudice not religion. the new testament does not state that homosexuality is bad. the old testament does. if this is truly a government decision based on religion than why does the government take into account the judeo and catholic religion on this issue. was this country not founded by protestan christians.