Greece and Rome, and Indian tribes, and head hunter tribes, and everyone, have always had marriage law, whether it was called just law, or the law of the official religion that made marriage law.
We may see things evolve to where people getting married in church is just a religious ceremony, and not a legal marriage. The legal marriage may need to be done by a justice e of the peace.
This is one way the distinction can be forced. That would be the silver lining of such a dark cloud.
The article I linked to below discusses what I believe is an important concept for tens of millions of people determining whether they can continue to identify with the Republican Party. I noted below in a letter posted various places that embracing a “rethinking of marriage” means forcing people to abandon foundational faith principles in order to maintain their affiliation.
The repeal of Prop 8 represents repression of core religious beliefs. Jewish, Christian, and Muslim believers find their Constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion threatened by overturning Prop 8. For many followers of the desert religions homosexual behavior is unacceptable. Instead it resides among the myriad sins entrapping humanity that lives in a fallen world with a fallen nature.
For them foundational scholarship concludes homosexual relationships separate believers from God. The Old Testament, holy to “People of the Book”, speaks of the character, identity, and purpose of God in a manner, which continuously addresses homosexuality. God is spoken of as masculine, and all humans become feminine in relation to Him. In addition to creating all things, God created the single institution of heterosexual marriage as the earthy manifestation of the relationship of absolute unity and love He seeks with each person.
Classical Semitic theology emphasizes searching for and identifying with God in the spiritual dimension. In order to be “good” actions and thoughts must reinforce the faith commitment to relationship. Therefore, when believers enter into heterosexual marriage here on Earth there is not a more profound affirmation and acceptance by faith by humans of God’s promise of eternal relationship. All other forms of sexual union must be considered a rejection of God’s promise and hope for relationship with Him. For tens of millions of Jewish, Christian, and Muslim believers any subsequent reasoning from scriptures must proceed from that basic understanding. Therefore, instituting gay marriage, when believers reject homosexuality, means placing these people outside the Constitutional boundaries guaranteeing religious freedom.
The words of Jesus in Matthew are appropriate here when He says render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s. That word was sufficient foundation for the First Amendment to our Constitution. In this case rendering unto Caesar means using an entirely humanist approach to fabricate the desired characteristics of civil union and not touching concepts sourced in spiritual faith.
This is not about ‘gay’ marriage.
It is about having the government(your tax money) ‘fund’ whatever object one proposes to marry. Be it a man, woman, dog, sheep, or a rock.
when you use religion in a legal argument you surrender reason and logic. IOW you lost before you start.
You may not like it but the fact is that is the way the courts operate.
There is no legal “love test” in marriage, just do you meet the criteria. The homosexuals are defining marriage based on a fondness for a sex act.
People get married every day by justices of the peace and what have you outside the church. They may never have set foot in a church and become legally married. However they did not engage in holy matrimony. So yes perhaps the only recourse left is to apply the term "holy matrimony" to Christian marriages
The author is also incorrect in stating that "Matters of inheritance, medical care, joint property, custody of children, real estate, royalties, social security, pensions" are purely contractual matters.
There are many circumstances where the courts cannot intervene, because it is defined by statute.
This list isn't complete. But, it's enough to demonstrate that these issues cannot be solved by contract.
Don’t bet anything of value on the possibility of a Constitutionaly focused SCOTUS ruling.
I think they sell pitchforks at Home Depot.
“Marriage has always essentially been a function of “the church””
Don’t discount the state’s involvement, having a keen interest in creation of new taxpayers and keeping them off the public dole until they can earn confiscatable sums.
If it were purely a religious matter, there would be no fuss (save for forcing sociopolitical opponents into submission). Follow the money: the state provides incentives & benefits to committed relationships likely to procreate; now those who can’t are demanding those entitlements even though they have zero chance of doing that which the entitlements are intended to facilitate. All carrot, no stick.
FYI, “Marriage” comes from the word, “Marry,” which meant to take an oath upon the Blessed Virgin Mary. “Marry,” is simply an archaic spelling of “Mary.”
“Married, filing jointly”.
My left wing niece that married a further left man hired her brother to go on line and be ordained. They obtained an Alaskan marriage license and then the newly brother went with them out into the boondocks somewhere and performed the ceremony
The brother became the “Officiant” and presumably signed off.
Alaska presumably allows this for non residents in case there is interest
Exactly! If the government didn’t intrude into marriage with things like tax breaks and other legal matters, there wouldn’t be near as much hubub!
A ridiculous and ignorant post.
Holy Matrimony!
Amen!
How quaint and archaic. Time to move into the 21st century. < /sarc >
Promoting “homosexual” “Marriage” is irrational and pure Marxism which is incompatible with our “Justice” System based on “Right Reason according to Natural Law”.
This Marxist ideology is dehumanizing-—and unjust-—to pretend males and females are interchangeable and the same. It is a Lie-—as all Marxist ideology is.
Just Law is based on Truth-—which is only available with Natural Law Theory (or God’s Laws—revelation). The US jurisprudence system is based on “...the Laws of Nature and nature’s God”——which is incompatible with selling babies which deny biological connection and using women’s bodies as breeding machines-—like Marxism always does.
All Just Law has to promote Virtue-—and that includes Natural Duties which includes the basic First Principles of raising your OWN genetic offspring. Any system which denies biological connections is Marxism which is an ideology which wants to destroy ALL biological connections and the idea of God-—so the State is god and parents have no say into the forming of minds of their children.
Total dehumanization is Marxism-—removeal of ALL unique identity in people-—even the Truth/Fact of male/female identity. It is to destroy and corrupt Reason and Logic in children so they can collapse civil society with dumb, useful idiots-—”happy slaves” who are so irrational they believe “snow is black” (males are females) (Fichte 1810).
These useful idiots are controlled by pop culture and rhetoric of the Leftists-—it is what Prussian schools are designed to pump out-—useful idiots for the elites who control all curricula, media, ideas given to the masses. (One way to “think” LOL)
Sick, vile images (media) are forced onto our kids with the Jenner cover, etc.——to corrupt and condition children and the masses and embed the correct “emotions” for the NWO of “happy slavery”.
What's missing?
I don't have a problem with the federal government staying the h3ll out of the church's business. I would have a problem with any church that married up anything other than hetero couples.