The Left sets out to destroy marriage.
The Republican response? Destroy marriage.
And the goal of Marx and Engels is fulfilled.
Marriage is destroyed.
I respectfully disagree...
Marriage was redefined by the courts. When one uses the term “marriage” it now means basically ANYTHING...
OTOH, “Holy Matrimony” is something that can be defined by the churches with their own standards as it relates to religious freedom. SCOTUS fell all over itself to make sure this was clear in the ruling...
The state will now get OUT of the marriage business and the churches will get into the Holy Matrimony business...
It’s not a perfect solution but it’s at least a start in the right direction to making their “victory” hollow...
Taking marriage out of the hands of the government is not destroying marriage, it’s protecting it and putting it back into the proper venue - namely religion.
Marriage is destroyed because the state can’t get the definition right or doesn’t issue a license? The state wishes it had that kind of power.
Freegards
No, civil marriage was just destroyed by the Left. It cannot be salvaged. Next up the battle to protect marriage from the Left. The gutsy Republicans (and some Dems) will take the position that marriage is a first amendment right of churches only. Anyone else using the term marriage is referring to "civil marriage" which now means nothing or anything.
Fight the battle to protect marriage and at the same time expand civil marriage to cover anything and everything. If I were in Alabama I would instruct local officials to hand out civil marriage licenses to any two animate objects that walk in the door. In Californica it can be a woman and a tree (I think it already has). All protected under the law. If the tree dies, the woman gets all the firewood.
no, marriage of a man and a woman is still the parvenu of the Church.
a Contract for Cohabitation becomes the parvenu of common law
this solution was available prior to the SCOTUS decision. the CFC is in effect an LLC corporation, a contractual arrangement to achieve the goal of managing common property and interests and finances under the IRS code
The practice of licensing marriage is ridiculous. It goes back to medieval times, in which vassals were bound to the land, effectively the “furniture” that came with inherited or acquired land. The lord would “license” marriage among these peasants. A free people should not need licenses to marry.
You've missed what happened in Obergefell. The SCOTUS already destroyed marriage as a civil institution. By their decision there is now an institution in all 50 states falsely called "marriage" which is not marriage. Whether it optimally takes the form of the bill in Alabama, or some other form (Fr. John Whiteford proposed each state creating a "community property registry" and a "registry of potential births"), the correct response is not to accept the Newspeak version of "marriage" which means whatever the Federal government says it means, but for the several states to refuse to participate in the sham the SCOTUS has foisted on us.
Wrong. Marriage is a tenet of religion...the state is not.
How government involvement in Holy Matrimony, is not a violation of "separation of church and state" eludes me.