I’m horrified at seeing a majority deciding to roll back rights for a minority, but I also wonder about the underlying process of marriage itself.
There’s one other ceremony that comes to mind that has similar characteristics: baptism.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but in the past, wasn’t baptism when people officially named their child?
Why don’t we split marriage the same way baptism has been split:
Baptism:
- Ceremony in a church
- Naming of a child
- Celebration
- Religious ritual
Marriage:
- Ceremony in a church
- Changing legal status (single / common-law to married)
- Celebration
- Religious ritual
In short: make all marriages into two distinct parts:
- Civil / legal process (birth certificate / civil union forms)
- Celebration (church / etc)
Because the separation of church and state is a very important one and the church is fighting very hard to reunite.
March 16, 2009 at 12:01 am
I think marriage should be available to all. What about transgendered people, can they not marry?
May 12, 2009 at 3:50 am
Baptism is not when a child gets named. That is called Christening, and most churches do not do that. Most people do not name their children at christening.
I’m not a religious person, so thank you for the correction. I knew it was something similar, and my point is the same: at one point the church was the normal place to go for both ritual and legal matters; now they’re supposed to be separate.
Marriages are a legal agreement between two specific parties: a Male and a Female. it’s not religious, it’s legal. The marriage is represented by the legal certificate and is valid with or without a ceremony. The church has zero to do with it.
This is where I disagree; currently if you wish to join together with minimal fuss it’s generally either eloping or a civil union. Governmental “Marriage” has rights granted to it that “civil union” does not, yet they are the same thing in essence – people binding their lives and families together. Marriage, however, has it’s roots and connotations in the church / religious matters, and civil unions were for second marriages when divorce was taboo.
I personally do not care who can or cannot get married, as most marriages fail anyways. But you need to get your facts straight.
45% – 50% is most? And you know what they say about facts and statistics *winks*
Your post makes zero sense to someone who actually knows what Baptism is, and understands the legal ramifications of marriage.
Oh I think you give people too little credit, Candice… after all… you managed it, right?