Replies

Both sides are asking the wrong question. The right questions is: why is the government involved in marriage, a religious ceremony, in the first place?

Are you sure you thought this through? Maybe you are a Libertarian anarchist?

Why is society involved in marriage? Why is religion involved in marriage?

Marriage has been around since the beginning; before government. There are many things the government recognizes, promotes and protects that are inalienable, endowed by the Creator.

Government did not create marriage and therefore can not redefine it.

Not counting you and other anarchic moral pacifists there are two sides to this issue which mirrors many other issues of the day.

There are those that want to redefine and impose upon society some leftist Utopian concept of fairness versus those who want to maintain that which is time tested and successful -a result of the free marketplace of ideas and choices made freely by millions upon millions over the centuries.

Homosexual marriage is a leftist construct. To NOT oppose the left is to promote the left -pick a side.

I have certainly thought this through but judging by your tone I doubt it will make a difference to you. This is unfortunate because I believe we both want to protect traditional marriage.

First of all the idea that less government is better government is hardly anarchist, although plenty of nanny staters who claim to be conservatives would like to think otherwise.

That said, our founders chose to protect our inalienable, creator endowed rights by placing checks on the government power to interfere. Foolishly, many have chosen to give government power over things we want to protect or promote but in doing so we ceded control, power, and legitimacy to the politicians and bureaucrats.

Giving government the power to involve itself in marriage was great... until it wasn't and now you have governments perverting marriage. Had marriage been kept out of the hands of government, two sodomites could be joined in any silly ceremony they wanted but it would not be marriage, and would have no more legitimacy than what they could convince others of. Now that same perversion can be legally sanctioned with the same benefits as a real marriage. Now we are not just facing cultural rot but government sanctioned and protected rot.

So back to my original question, why involve the government in the first place? What would it have cost us as a nation to make no laws, or regulations regarding marriage. What would it have cost us to keep the legal aspects of marriage strictly in the realm of contracts? I don't want a government definition of marriage specifically because I don't trust them not to pervert that definition. I want government out of the marriage business so I am free to shun wrongdoers without fear of government retribution. I want to protect what is good in the same way I believe our founders did, and that is to keep government away.