Let me just say, as a person in who is in a civil, heterosexual marriage:
but like it or not. marriage is a religious sacrement, a deeply religious binding of two people in many religions.... and i thinnk as long as we use that word for the civil and religious acts.... we are gonna have trouble
Then the religious people need a different word for *their* arrangement. "Sacrament of matrimony", for instance.
WE WERE THERE FIRST. Marriage as a human institution is older and more widespread than any religion in particular, or even than religion in general. The fact that a lot of Americans think it's *primarily* religious is unfortunate, but they are WRONG.
I will not let them -- or you! -- say that my civil marriage isn't "really" marriage, that I should be willing to drop a word that is woven into our legal codes, because it destroys their delusion that all human institutions are religious.
No. Civil marriage *is* marriage. I am just as married as someone who was married in a church.
Hear bloody hear, and amen. (Also married in a civil ceremony, and very happy with it.)
The one thing I *didn't* like about getting married was filling out the paperwork for the license and reading that same-sex couples were specifically forbidden to plow through the exact forms that I was.
as i said..... i dont have any problem with anyone being married. but i think the confusion between civil and religious terms will only be resolved by DIVIDING the terminology
and under CIVIL law... well... fine, you have a basis for demanding CIVIL rights..... but when you demand that people change their religious beliefs to suit you? no they wont.
so in my non expert opinion the way to get over the problem that a lot of people are opposing your civil rights on religious grounds, is to *separate* the terminology.. legally.
since we already have a term for the contract under civil law that is a civil marriage. "civil union" i suggest we have the givt only. ONLY recognize that leave the churches to their own choices.
Seconded. Why should ... ah, never mind. I can't let myself get drawn into this right now; too many other stressors etc. going on, but... let everyone marry. If they want to have a religious ceremony, call it "holy" matrimony rather than just "matrimony", or "holy marriage" rather than just marriage.
Too simple for the bigots to accept, though. Damn.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rm
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 02:24 am (UTC)but like it or not. marriage is a religious sacrement, a deeply religious binding of two people in many religions.... and i thinnk as long as we use that word for the civil and religious acts.... we are gonna have trouble
Then the religious people need a different word for *their* arrangement. "Sacrament of matrimony", for instance.
WE WERE THERE FIRST. Marriage as a human institution is older and more widespread than any religion in particular, or even than religion in general. The fact that a lot of Americans think it's *primarily* religious is unfortunate, but they are WRONG.
I will not let them -- or you! -- say that my civil marriage isn't "really" marriage, that I should be willing to drop a word that is woven into our legal codes, because it destroys their delusion that all human institutions are religious.
No. Civil marriage *is* marriage. I am just as married as someone who was married in a church.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 03:05 am (UTC)The one thing I *didn't* like about getting married was filling out the paperwork for the license and reading that same-sex couples were specifically forbidden to plow through the exact forms that I was.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 03:31 am (UTC)and under CIVIL law... well... fine, you have a basis for demanding CIVIL rights.....
but when you demand that people change their religious beliefs to suit you? no
they wont.
so in my non expert opinion the way to get over the problem that a lot of people are opposing your civil rights on religious grounds, is to *separate* the terminology.. legally.
since we already have a term for the contract under civil law that is a civil marriage. "civil union" i suggest we have the givt only. ONLY recognize that
leave the churches to their own choices.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 06:02 am (UTC)Too simple for the bigots to accept, though. Damn.