Ok, so I’ve had a long day with a lot of exhausting debate and frustration… so consider this question and please chime in as you see fit.
- Marriage was an institution long before the USA, so if there is a separation between church and state (as some like to argue), who should go?
- It is my opinion that the state should go.
- Why should there be any tax credit’s or other incentives for marriage? I’m looking for an answer here that does not involve social engineering by the state…
- This is the premise of the newest Massachusetts Gay Marriage lawsuit over federal ‘benefits’ of marriage…
- If there are no state or federal recognition ‘benefits’, would homosexuals be fighting to re-define marriage?
- So I found this little gem of a resource (HERE)[not an endorsement, just a resource]:
George Washington was married without a marriage license. So, how did we come to this place in America where marriage licenses are issued?
Historically, all the states in America had laws outlawing the marriage of blacks and whites. In the mid-1800’s, certain states began allowing interracial marriages or miscegenation as long as those marrying received a license from the state. In other words they had to receive permission to do an act which without such permission would have been illegal.
Blacks Law Dictionary points to this historical fact when it defines “marriage license” as, “A license or permission granted by public authority to persons who intend to intermarry.” “Intermarry” is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary as, “Miscegenation; mixed or interracial marriages.”
Give the State an inch and they will take a 100 miles (or as one elderly woman once said to me “10,000 miles.”) Not long after these licenses were issued, some states began requiring all people who marry to obtain a marriage license. In 1923, the Federal Government established the Uniform Marriage and Marriage License Act (they later established the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act). By 1929, every state in the Union had adopted marriage license laws.
- Now understanding we now have 80 years of marriage law in our history, what really are the obstacles to getting the government out of marriage (and back to its roots)?
- I know, I know… government wants power and authority over us!
- Would we be fighting the battles we are today if the secularites got their way and the church demanded the state relinquish involvement in marriages?
- Wouldn’t we be better fighting our cause by arguing LESS federal and state oversight into marriages… not MORE convoluted bureaucracy?
- I think so. I firmly believe that ’small government – social progressives’ come down on the wrong side of this issue. They should not be in favor of any sort of state recognized marriage… and should fight accordingly… unless it is a hypocritical tax benefit thing they have going… Marriage is not a federal issue or a state issue.
So there you have it… some questions for you to ponder and share your responses… I look forward to some very wise and knowledgeable responses to ’set me right’…
The state absolutely should get out of the business of marriage. Marriage is a covenant between a man, a woman, and God anyway—I don’t see any room for Uncle Sam in that threesome.
I don’t think we would be fighting these things in the political arena if the state were to get out, however, I think our churches would come under renewed attack from the homosexual community to revise their doctrines to allow homosexual “marriage.” They have already been successful in a number of Christian denominations, and I don’t know that many of our churches are strong enough to resist their advances. Unfortunately, the previous generation has done a poor job of catechizing the young people (up and coming leaders in the churches) and giving them a strong doctrinal basis for their faith. It’s all about “feeling” to most people now.