*DISCLAIMER* This blog takes no position, nor holds any moral judgement in favor or against either position. It does attempt to look at this issue from a civil rights, and constitutional perspective.
First of all, to deny consenting, adult, same-sex couples the same legal rights as heterosexual couples is a civil rights issue. The issue at hand is, what defines marriage? I wonder that myself. In this day and age we do live in a society that holds a rather high divorce rate, and it does not appear to be culturally as "sacred" as tradition has portrayed it. Perhaps "marriage" has a religious connotation and we need to re-evaluation the separation of church and state, in regards to this issue.
PROPOSAL...
I propose that the government gets rid of marriage all together, and deems civil union the only contractual agreements recognized by the government for ALL consenting adult couples choosing to build a life together. This would eliminate any "religious" or "moral" debate between the two opposing positions and keep it to a civil rights issue. Then, allow the individual faith based institutions to define what a marriage is.
The religious institutions should not feel a threat or worry of loosing their non-profit status, they can keep their individual interpretations this way. And, same-sex couples would have the option of having the same legal rights and protections as heterosexual couples in society.
Both positions need to acknowledge that not everyone will see "eye to eye" regarding this controversial issue. So, lets look for solutions. From a spiritual perspective, ALL are called to NOT judge, and we are called to love our brother; God himself does not violate man's free will, and society needs to respect free will amongst consenting adults whose behavior is not harming anyone. The only option is to look for justice and peace regarding this issue, and I don't think that will happen unless this is truly acknowledged as a civil rights issue.
People don't like to discuss this issue, because it is so controversial. I don't even feel comfortable discussing it, for fear of offending someone. But...WE need to talk about it. I encourage people to create and open dialogue, and look for a solution.
5 comments:
I haven't heard anyone else make this proposal, Katie. This unique idea is cause for most people's brains to do somersaults!
This idea has much merit. It could be a plausible solution to a heart wrenching problem. But would both sides go for it?
Slam Dunk!
Separation of Church and State would support the notion of "civil unions" being the only legally recognized contract between consenting adults. Divisions of Church and State seemed to enforced only when it is convenient for the judicial and legislative branches. Do we adhere to this ideology or not? Certainly, we must support it because eventually our religous beliefs could be infringed upon by the state.
The state acknowledges civil unions.
The church defines and acknowledges marriage in the traditional sense. Catholics must complete pre-marital counseling before the Church will recognize their marriage. This is an example of the church "regulating" marriage outside of the legal obligations of the larger society. If it is already common practice that religion operates separate from social marriage, then this proposal does not depart too drastically from what society is already doing.
hi. I am your sister.
Agreed, Pamela.
Post a Comment