Nope. Marriage is a civil institution. In its historical essence, for 5000+ years, it has been a socio-economic contract securing property and inheritance. The Church as a generalized institution has only been actively involved in attempts to control that contract for maybe 500 years.
This is an Amendment I issue, at the absolute core of the separation of church and state. That the several States of the Union have chosen to recognize religious marriages as valid civil contracts does not make religious marriage the only valid form of such contract.
Constitutionally, the rights of citizens to enter into civil contracts, so long as they do not violate any fair and objective law or the rights of other citizens, should prevail over any and all religious impositions.
Looking at a country where marriage is a religious issue and there is no such thing as a civil/secular marriage, this is a bad thing. People regularly have to leave the country in order to get married because they don't fit into the correct boxes.
Comments 4
Reply
In my latest post I put a pile of links to groups fighting this. The fight isn't over.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
This is an Amendment I issue, at the absolute core of the separation of church and state. That the several States of the Union have chosen to recognize religious marriages as valid civil contracts does not make religious marriage the only valid form of such contract.
Constitutionally, the rights of citizens to enter into civil contracts, so long as they do not violate any fair and objective law or the rights of other citizens, should prevail over any and all religious impositions.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment