Marriage and the State

I`ve just finished browsing the New York Times, and I came across a section of portraits of recently married same-sex couples...and I`ll be honest it made me cringe.

The marriage part did.

The first thought that crossed my mind was that I would rather marriage was relegated to churches, temples, adobe houses, and mosques where they belong, whether same-sex or heterosexual.

Is there anyone else who would rather marriage was a private phenomenon? What right does The State have in giving incentives to marriage?

Oh, sure. I`ve heard the whole bit about married couples being a stabilizing force within society, and I believe I`ve heard that some politicians might think married couples to be their primary tax-payers and constituents...

But I don`t buy any of that. I`m still crept up by the feeling that this is religious residue from the time when The Church and State were in cahoots, and it was not enough to think Louis XIV cute, you had to think him a God as well. :2thumbsup:

Any like-minded posters out there?

 

I believe that marriage was a strictly religious concept, until the state stepped in and started fooling with it.

Such as, seeing as I have no living close relatives, just to have someone visit me if I was in a hospital, I'd have to marry them first.

 

To be honest, I feel the state and The Church were always intermixed on a few levels...

But I think marriage is one anachronism that could easily just GO from the state, much like prayer in schools; concerning all these practicalities around custody of children, death, and property.

How???

Just migrate marriage laws into civil unions. Crashing on your girlfriend`s couch never was so dangerous...

 

I think the government should stay out of people's relationships. And their bedrooms. But, I support any relationship - monogamy, polygamy, polyamory, group marriage, shacking up, fucking your cousin, sucking the mailman's cock, whatever. Do what you want. Live it up.

 

I agree.

I think there should be civil contracts, though I'm not sure how strong they should be, that are like the city hall marriage today. And common law marriage.

I think "marriage" should be a religious thing. If "marriage" is so strongly related to religion, that a holy book tells you who can and can't get married if you belong to that religion, you have no business asking the state to enforce your idea of marriage in a secular country.

I can see having benefits associated with designating a mate, honestly, which I suppose, is more than you see. But if you want it to be a tree stump, hell if I care....

 

Marriage should be private, its one of many issues where the state should not be involved. Everything in society now days has to be involved with money one way or another. Although one shouldn't be too surprised since those who promote religion so heavily, also decided our laws and govern them.

 

I never want to get married for the exact reason that I don't want the state interferring with my private life. What's the gubbament got to do, got to do-o-o with it? Who needs a law when a law can be broken...

 

I also believe that there should be simple civil contracts based on what government recognizes marriage does. There could be several different types of civil contracts based on what you want to accomplish, instead of a one size fits all like marriage. Although, what with prenuptial agreements and such, marriage is no longer one size fits all either.

And then marriage could remain what it has always been a primarily religious concept, what God hath joined together.

Although for many marriage has long ago stopped having anything to do with religion and now has become a big whoop dee do to tell everyone you are now sleeping together with all the legal benefits.

 

Let me run this idea by you guys, see if you agree. How about making common law unions elapse into civil unions based on the length of time a couple lives together? And if you want a different agreement than the default agreements set by the law, write a prenup at any time.

Alternatively, if you want a civil union agreement, petition the state for it. That way I save my fucking tax money from ceremony and unnecessary bureaucracy.

Then they can use that tax money to give it back to me or something...just saying. :love:

Exactly. It makes me feel forced to be the third wheel on someone else`s date.

 

I think this is a strange idea.

I wouldn't mind the state dropping tax breaks and whatnot for married; but I don't see any reason to be against other people being married.

I, being one who believes in marriage, however, wish it wasn't the norm. Too many people fuck it up by picking shitty partners and getting divorced.

Marriage appears in most cultures throughout the world and history; some more religious, some less. It predates recorded history. Marriage wasn't even recognized by the Christian church until 325 CE.

People have been bonding themselves to one another for as long as we know; and religion has nothing to do with that.

 

Correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't the state want marriages to fail so they then make money off the filing process? Well maybe they don't want it to 'fail' ... but they do making money?

 

Finally, something that we agree on.

I think marriage is worse than a mere religious artifact. It has its roots in a time when women were considered to be property to be transfered from one man to another (father to husband). The process also implies that two (or more) adults need someone else's permission to sleep with each other or live together. That's wrong.

I don't personally see a lot of value in civil unions either. My boyfriend and I share a house, with both names on the deed, and have joint financial accounts. My living will says that if I become a vegetable and the doctors recommend disconnecting life support, my boyfriend is the one who makes the final decision, not my father. A simple change to the law would allow us to be on the same health care plan if needed, and I can already designate anyone I want as the beneficiary of my life insurance. We also have wills insuring that all joint physical property will go to the survivor. I think we have everything pretty much taken care of, without government assistance or interference.

I suppose there might be some value in having a civil union if we split up and had children together, which we don't. There has to be some kind of plan for custody and child support in those cases. And if I had given up my career to be a stay at home mom, then I would need and deserve some money from my ex, at least for a while. But I think all that could be addressed by going to a lawyer who does prenuptial agreements and having a simple contract drawn up, stating what you have agreed to. Any adult can enter into a legal contract of any kind.

A move toward customized contracts and away from generic legal marriage would completely take the government out of everything, except for the laws against incest and pedophilia. All the debates about what marriage should be would become irrelevant. Want to live in a sexual relationship with a man and two women? Have your lawyer write it up. Open relationship? That's a line item. Time limit? Put in in there.

I'm for almost anything that gets rid of divorce lawyers and the games they play. That's a broken system, if I have ever seen one.

Society is slowly evolving beyond the old ways of thinking, little by little. For example, have you noticed that the word "bastard" has become rare? it is no longer a big deal to be a bastard, so we don't need a negative term for it. You also rarely hear young guys talking about the expectation of marrying a virgin.

To me, one of the worst marriage traditions that we are still saddled with is the idea that an upper-middle class girl should have a wedding that costs tens of thousands of dollars and takes a full year to plan. That's just absurd. It's an outrageous ego trip for the bride, and a huge waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere, or put into savings.

 

See, that`s interesting. I did not know that...and IMO laws about pedophilia are the legitimate domain of government since we`re talking about crime.

Exactly. And yet, I think the same thing could be said about any birthday, funeral, or Caribbean cruise. I just don`t see why my tax money should be involved in any of it.

Wanna marry? That`s cool with me. It`s certainly none of my business...Do it on your own dime, in your church or backyard; have the sound system turned off by 10pm, and I`ll be happy.

 

World afraid to get hitched to itself. Needs little marriages still? Taxpayers rings fitted by proxy.

 

Cherea:

Holy shit, you're growing up! Spit that fucking eucharist out, quick!

The world wide wedding is calling you! : D

 

Yeah....

Well of course the only problem is the law, and I'm glad that not being married works okay for you.

But do you have any kids?

I have a daughter, and her mother is currently my girlfriend, though that changing wouldn't change our cordial relationship or parenting relationship, even if we hate each others guts that's obviously not fair to do to a kid.

But me giving or taking money as I can or I need, us generally helping each other, isn't enough for the state, who are preparing to saddle me with child support to someone who I'm already helping, and doing a lot more for than just paying out a monthly check. They want more info on me than the probation department, including my social haunts, I think my vehicles VIN, identifying marks (in more detail than for probation) etc. "what bars does he like, and KINDS of friends, does he have?"

So..... if you have a kid in texas, without being married, you're basically considered criminal for 18 years. The only way to change that would be to marry someone I don't want to marry, and create an unhappy unhealthy family situation:love:

Oh, dunno if I mentioned, unless she changes her mind (which she is, of course, free to do) she's going to be telling the court she doesn't WANT child support, and we generally don't want them monkeying in our private relationship. I still expect to be ordered to pay. To pay via the attorney general's office to a person I'll see later that same day in person.

So yes, they'd like me to pay the state to get married, and then to get divorced, and then for more child support oversee-ment..... all the while creating state jobs to keep tabs on my personal life.

Don't mind me, just venting here.

*edit* also, yes, why would gay people want this? right now strait people are forced into this, and gay people have the choice to live together, but are forbidden (many places) from marrying-sounds like having your cake and eating it too, to me.

*edit2* if you need laws to keep families together, you already lost the battle, and your laws only make them LOOK together, so you have nice stats. If the family works well, they'll MAKE their shit work, no matter what bullshit the state does or does not throw at them.

 

It all goes back to the time of Hammurabi. Government is religion; Religion is government. No matter what they say, they will never, ever separate the two. They are used to control us.

Marriage, in the state's eyes, is all about a written contract between two people. Two people, that up until recent times, had to be a male and a female...consenting adults (or consenting minor with stupid consenting parents). Not more than 60 years ago, they had to be the same race/ethnicity/color too.

I don't support arbitrary licensing of "marriage". I do support the idea of two consenting people making a contract of any kind with each other. Should the government have a hand in this? History tells us "Fuck no".

 

Yes. Government has to protect true victims. And while there might be grounds for a legitimate debate over the age of consent, I think we can agree that a child cannot understand sex or serious relationships well enough to decide on a direction for their lives. Whether it's 18, 16, or 14, somebody has to pick a number. For me, I honestly didn't get it until I was about 20.

I'm glad that we were finally able to agree on something important, since you and I appear to be two of the most sexually liberated people on the forum.

:cheers2:

 

On Same sex marriage, the stats from the states are similar to the stats out of the UK, only a miniscule percentage of gay people are actually getting married. Far more politicised than the .01 % of the population it actually represents, and I am very suspicious of that.


As for marriage itself, America faces a credit default crisis this week, economy is fucked. In times of yor and in many parts of the world today, marriage ment living with extended family, sharing costs and helping each other out. Maybe we have seen the end of the American dream (Same dream in most of the west) - Mum, Dad 2.1 kids in a nice McMansion with white picket fence and we need to get back to policies that promote larger family units.

But as for Government policies across the west, what is said outloud about supporting families is never delivered in reality. Government is more centred on big business, as it should be, and you dont really get rewarded financially for starting a family. So I'm suspicious of that too, and think when the governement is talking up "family values" its just about controlling the masses

 

That would be a fate worse than death to people like me. In the American South, the oldest people in the house make the rules, and everyone else is expected to conform without complaint. In most cases, absolute conformity is expected in religion and moral values. To be perfectly honest with you, I would go back to living in a nasty little cheap apartment with folding chairs before I would live under my father's rules again.

We have to find another way.