Saturday, April 13, 2013

Maybe We Ought To Do Away With Marriage!

Okay, the Republicans have closed the door on a voting block that is growing by the day.  Should Gays (all inclusive) be allowed to marry, number one, and should they be allowed to share benefits that heterosexual couples do.

Between this and the abortion debate, I wonder if we mere mortals should be deciding these things, what's more the government.  On abortion the argument has centered on when actual life begins.  I can accept it's when a heart beat is discernible.  Yet I am pro choice when it comes to egregious causes of pregnancy.  Mainly because if a woman is raped I would assume she has time to know whether or not she conceived.  The same with victims of incest.  Long before the pieces come together to form a human life. But it's not that simple is it?  What about at the moment of conception when all the living parts come together to make a whole?  Who should decide this? Should it be left to government officials?  I have my doubts.  Look at the politicians.  Do you want a Todd Akin making those decisions for you?

Similarly,  for the gay marriage issue, why is it a governmental issue?  It's a social and religious issue.  Who is wise enough to decide how marriage should be defined?  Perhaps it would be better if in the eyes of the government those who wish to join together form civil unions with the understanding that all that goes with it applies, from benefit distribution to dissolution of the union and the penalties that may apply.

If people want to go beyond a mere civil union and have the blessing of their church and their God, then that's between the two entities. A church wedding with all the frills. Let's face it, how can two atheists marry if they believe in no God?  If, however, they are a man and a woman they are considered married even with only a civil ceremony.

It is such a complex issue where one side is considered sick, demented and a whole lot of other names, while the other that can be just as vile yet be okay as long as it's the two sexes represented. It's not something the government should be trying to sort out because they can't leave their religious beliefs out of it.  They weren't elected to office to oversee and dictate my personal beliefs.

Time for the old cliche about the reasons for separation of church and state.  No religion should have the right to force it's beliefs on those who believe differently, yet here they are trying to define how a country should live and marry.  It's no different than the government trying to force it's beliefs on religious entities such is happening with parts of Obamacare.

The government is to provide guidelines, laws, under which we choose to live - or leave. Religions provide guidance for the soul determined by whatever set of teachings they choose to subscribe to.  They may parallel one another but they should never become one and the same to the exclusion of separation. Then we have Islam.  We can see how well that's working for it's people.

1 comment:

Word Tosser said...

"If people want to go beyond a mere civil union and have the blessing of their church and their God, then that's between the two entities"

This is exactly what I was going to post on Monday on my blog... my thoughts exactly... but you did a much better job of it..
I don't mind telling everyone I have a civil union.. I wasn't married in a church.. so let's do that.. have a civil union.. and let those who are religious go one step further and have a church ceremony if they chose. After all .. us straight people haven't done such a great job of marriage.. I know you and Hub have.. but there are a lot of divorces out there.. I even had one. It is hard for those who have been divorced to point the finger at those who refuse to let gays have a civil union. And let the churches decide if it should be ok to be in a church. Well, said Mari. But dang it.. now I have to figure out another subject to write about Monday. lol