Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I entered into a sacramental marriage, so it makes sense that the Church would handle that. In earlier times, marriage might also be a business arrangement, that follow other customs. So yes, other entities can be involved in their own ideas of social unions, including bigamy and polygamy.Would many people just dispense with marriage altogether if it went to the churches? Or are you saying it should be handled by other entities in addition to churches?
If it matters to you, then wouldn't you advertise via church bulletins and ask them to bring certification from their church?As a landlord, it matters to me if people are married, for example. I need to be able to find out.
There are reasons to disallow gay marriage that have nothing to do with religion, but have everything to do with biology, which I have already listed. You keep slamming religion, but can't seem to tell me why the 'secular' state wouldn't or shouldn't disallow gay marriages.Because a secular government does not discriminate on the basis of religion. Marriage as dictated by the state is a contract that confers rights and privileges to the spouses. Your church does not want to perform a religious ceremony, it is free to not do so. but denying the same rights to 2 committed adults is discrimination in the civil sphere. That's what you religious nuts fail to see. A marriage is 2 completely separate ceremony, one civil and one religious. You can have one without the other.
So you are saying bigamy and polygamy would be acceptable in this new society?I entered into a sacramental marriage, so it makes sense that the Church would handle that. In earlier times, marriage might also be a business arrangement, that follow other customs. So yes, other entities can be involved in their own ideas of social unions, including bigamy and polygamy.
Why should local government become involved? If there is a reason, shouldn't it be up to each couple to register their union--and what type it is?So you're only saying the federal government shouldn't be involved in marriage. But local gov't should? Is that correct?
I am not envisioning a new society. I am envisioning limited government. Why should government (or anyone) have to babysit our marriages? Can't we handle it independently?So you are saying bigamy and polygamy would be acceptable in this new society?
I don't think so. If you're allowing polygamy and bigamy and gay marriages and anything anybody wants, I don't think that works. It's way too nebulous. Don't misunderstand. I'm with you on limited government, but maintaining contracts and records are one of the few legitimate functions of government.I am not envisioning a new society. I am envisioning limited government. Why should government (or anyone) have to babysit our marriages? Can't we handle it independently?
There have to be public records, IMHO. There has to be an independent way of finding out the marital status of people So I don't see anyway you can get around an official pronouncement of what defines a marriage. Now if the Catholic Church had to handle everything regarding marriages including conducting them, defining them (as they already have), and providinga a central record of who is married, then I am 100% all in on that.Why should local government become involved? If there is a reason, shouldn't it be up to each couple to register their union--and what type it is?
Here is where we seem to differ: You want someone to handle marriage, just not the current authorities. I don't think anyone, other than the couple involved, needs to handle anything.I don't think so. If you're allowing polygamy and bigamy and gay marriages and anything anybody wants, I don't think that works. It's way too nebulous. Don't misunderstand. I'm with you on limited government, but maintaining contracts and records are one of the few legitimate functions of government.
Why? Are you trying to handle someone's marital situation? If so, why is that necessary?There has to be an independent way of finding out the marital status of people
The Catholic Church can certainly handle all the marriages of people who choose to be married in the Catholic Church, because the couple places themselves and their marriage under Church jurisdiction. However, there is no reason at all for the Catholic Church to manage marriages that take place in a synagogue or even another Christian denomination--not to mention civil unions of any type (for example the woman who married a roller coaster).Now if the Catholic Church had to handle everything regarding marriages including conducting them, defining them (as they already have), and providinga a central record of who is married, then I am 100% all in on that.
And yet the attacks on other religions aren't supposed to happen in his idealized Christian Nation. It isn't here yet and he's attacking you and your beliefs.You have no idea of how I practice Judaism.
Yeah, I really think there has to be public affirmation and records and definition of marriage.Here is where we seem to differ: You want someone to handle marriage, just not the current authorities. I don't think anyone, other than the couple involved, needs to handle anything.
And what were they do with all the gay people that are married. Would a Christian country annul all those marriages like the Nazis did when they took over Germany to dehumanize the Jews they were murdering .The Catholic Church can certainly handle all the marriages of people who choose to be married in the Catholic Church, because the couple places themselves and their marriage under Church jurisdiction. However, there is no reason at all for the Catholic Church to manage marriages that take place in a synagogue or even another Christian denomination--not to mention civil unions of any type (for example the woman who married a roller coaster).
Yeah, I really think there has to be public affirmation and records and definition of marriage.
That is the beauty of each couple handling their own union. No other entity or person has authority over it. For example, I could not care less if the gay community does not recognize my union; why should they care whether the Catholic Church recognizes their union if they were not married in the Catholic faith?And what were they do with all the gay people that are married. Would a Christian country annul all those marriages like the Nazis did when they took over Germany to dehumanize the Jews they were murdering .
Then you want someone in charge, but not those who are currently in charge, whereas I don't see a need for anyone to be in charge.Yeah, I really think there has to be public affirmation and records and definition of marriage.
Only the gays who still claim to the Catholic religion are harmed by what the Catholic religion says and does. They are free to leave, and many of my friends have left that church because of the hatred and bigotry. There are many churches that have finally come to their senses about homosexuality and are very accepting of gay people.That is the beauty of each couple handling their own union. No other entity or person has authority over it. For example, I could not care less if the gay community does not recognize my union; why should they care whether the Catholic Church recognizes their union if they were not married in the Catholic faith?
Let's say we had a fluid anything-goes system of marriage. How would you handle disputes in a will between exes? How would you handle parental rights in the case of a dissolution in the arrangement? Doesn't there have to be a referee?That is the beauty of each couple handling their own union. No other entity or person has authority over it. For example, I could not care less if the gay community does not recognize my union; why should they care whether the Catholic Church recognizes their union if they were not married in the Catholic faith?
