03 Apr 09
Originally posted by kirksey957Essentially marriage is a contract between consenting parties, the nature of that contract is the business of those two parties and not the guvamints, except for enforcement. This is where it gets tricky marrying a cow, because the cow has trouble understanding the concept of contract and may unknowingly violate some of the conditions.
http://content.usatoday.net/dist/custom/gci/InsidePage.aspx?cId=courier-journal&sParam=30479161.story
I guess they will want to marry cows next.
Those opposed to marriage being given equal status to their perception of what marriage is (let's face it they're mainly god botherers) can simply identify marriages they approve of by stating it i.e This marriage recognised by the Church of the Imaginary Friend. Then get the guvamint out of the marriage business, throw out all the tax incentives or dis-incentives, all the state mandated advantages or disadvantages of marriage.
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
05 Apr 09
Originally posted by WajomaThat maybe the Western ideal, but culturally it's not like that in many parts of the world. It's not necessarily like that for the very wealthy or the aristocratic. It's not like that for many religious or ethnic groups. One, therefore, needs to approach this from a different perspective.
Essentially marriage is a contract between consenting parties, the nature of that contract is the business of those two parties....
05 Apr 09
Originally posted by BadwaterThat's not a Western ideal, or a Southern, Northern or Eastern ideal, or a Nor' Nor East ideal, or a West Sou' West ideal.
That maybe the Western ideal, but culturally it's not like that in many parts of the world. It's not necessarily like that for the very wealthy or the aristocratic. It's not like that for many religious or ethnic groups. One, therefore, needs to approach this from a different perspective.
That is THE ideal.
It makes allowances for those aristocrats, religious or ethnic groups to follow their own beliefs when it comes to marriage, just that they cannot force those beliefs on those that do not share them.
05 Apr 09
Originally posted by BadwaterSeems the only perspective needed to be taken is the perspective of the laws within the state that you find yourself living. The rest of your perspective is irrelevant.
That maybe the Western ideal, but culturally it's not like that in many parts of the world. It's not necessarily like that for the very wealthy or the aristocratic. It's not like that for many religious or ethnic groups. One, therefore, needs to approach this from a different perspective.