by R. M. Gardner

Created on: February 16, 2009

Yes, gays and lesbians should be allowed civil unions but when it actually comes to marriage I have to say no. As far as I'm concerned gays and lesbians can unite in civil unions with all of the same benefits of marriage, the only exception being the actual term married.' Okay, why? And if you're allowing gays and lesbians the same benefits as married couples what real difference does it make? To understand that we first have to explore what marriage really is and I don't just mean in the biblical sense. Notice I said what marriage is, not how it is defined and while it might appear they one of the same when you really get down to it they're not.

In the United States marriage is both a legal contract and a religious promise, it's why most of us are married with some form of religious overtone and why Donald Trump get a prenup. Admittedly some couples are married without any religious theme, maybe through a court house or Justice of the Peace. We call these couples married because our culture never had a common term for the strictly legal aspect until recently with Civil Unions. Now that we can see marriage, for the most part, is a two part deal we can turn our attention to actually defining it. Even here we might be jumping the gun a little, after all who gets to define marriage, our government or our church?

I'm sure we've all seen enough lawyer shows on television to be somewhat familiar with the term legal precedent. Basically something that has happened in the past that guides the decisions of the present. To be fair there are different kinds or precedent, some that have to be considered before making a judgement but don't necessarily mandate the precedent must be abided by. And there are binding precedents that are just that, binding or mandatory, such as rulings of the Supreme Court that must be followed by all lower courts. This is where who gets to decide the definition of marriage gets a little tricky and ties itself in a knot. The teachers of religious doctrine had defined marriage millennia before the formation of this country and as far as I know, no religious doctrin defines marriage between members of the same sex. Understanding that I'm no expert but I'm fairly certain that throughout human history marriage has always been under the purview of the religious communities. Where the legal aspects of marriage first came to pass I'm not sure but I'm thinking it was after the formation of this county. Even if this isn't the case as a newly formed country

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>