4 of 34

Yes

Write now Print Email Article Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites Contact this writer

We're going to try a different tack here from the usual morality, biblical, religious self-righteous reproductive approach and take a serious look at what marriage is and why it is.

Marriage began as a religious institution with legal consequences. That is, marriage from a religious standpoint has a purpose, and that purpose bled over into legal ramifications. Rather than simply forming a family unit, spouses have recognized and protected legal rights. What happens because of this is a blurring of the line between Church and State.

If the government forced recognition of MARRIAGE, then it would also stage itself to intervene in churches' decisions as to who to allow to marry and who to decline. Can you imagine a more unconstitutional moment than the Supreme Court ordering a Church to perform a Marriage ceremony? Even now, Marriage has spawned its own branch of the court system, and billions of taxpayer dollars are spent each year dissolving, affirming, and mediating a religious insitution.

There needs to be a separation point. The Civil Union is simply the word I'm using here. A Civil union should serve as a non-religious alternative to marriage, allowing a couple to enjoy all the rights and priveldges of marriage without the religious trappings and muddling. Or, as I've been known to put it "They should get to suffer just like the rest of us."

Long term homosexual partnerships SHOULD absolutely be subject to the same laws and regulations as marriages. If there are children, there should be custody and support protection for those children. Alimony, division of property, inheritance and advocate rights should absolutely be assigned.

The answer to this is to cease using marriage as the baseline for companionship unions in this country. The government should recognize Civil Union and only Civil Union, allowing marriage to remain religiously isolated. That is, Any couple, of any sort capable of signing and agreeing to a contract should be allowed to be joined in union. But Marriage should be reserved as a religious right. Protecting the Churches' right to discretion as to who is permitted to marry (And they do decline to marry more than just homosexuals. Chronic adulterers, serial wives, and couples who they just think are a bad idea) is a paramount requirement of the Constitution and should hold just as much sway as protecting an individual's right to take a partner, create a family unit, and appoint advocates and heirs. Force insurance companies, hospitals, and courts to recognize the rights of the Civilly joined and let a marriage ceremony be the gravy on the mashed potatoes of a legally recognized union.

Learn more about this author, Keeley Markham.
Click here to send author comments or questions.

more options

hide

Add your voice

Know something about Should gays and lesbians be allowed civil unions but not marriage??
We want to hear your view. Write now!