Mormon Leaders Call for Laws That Protect Religious Freedom
Posted by XenokRoy 9 years, 2 months ago to Legislation
This is my religion, but frankly they are over complicating things. We just need to seperate marriage (a largely religious thing) and the civil union (a largely cultural thing with some legal contract aspects to it) into separate contracts.
Government has no business hijacking a religious contract (marriage) and using it as a civil contract. They have no business in marriage, either to enforce it or not.
The correct law is to get out of marriage, leave it to the realm of religion. If prodastants want to marry gays they can, if LDS does not they do not have to. Government GET OUT is the answer.
The civil union is something that everyone needs to have equal access to. Does not matter if its two guys, two girls or a grandmother and daughter. It does not require sex between the two people to be part of the relationship. It only creates civil benefits between those two in caring for children and those who entered the contract when disabled. Very important civil contract to be sure but something that if not separated from marriage there is no way to protect the rights of both groups.
What are your thoughts
Government has no business hijacking a religious contract (marriage) and using it as a civil contract. They have no business in marriage, either to enforce it or not.
The correct law is to get out of marriage, leave it to the realm of religion. If prodastants want to marry gays they can, if LDS does not they do not have to. Government GET OUT is the answer.
The civil union is something that everyone needs to have equal access to. Does not matter if its two guys, two girls or a grandmother and daughter. It does not require sex between the two people to be part of the relationship. It only creates civil benefits between those two in caring for children and those who entered the contract when disabled. Very important civil contract to be sure but something that if not separated from marriage there is no way to protect the rights of both groups.
What are your thoughts
Add Comment
All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read
- 2Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 9 years, 2 months agoYes. Instead of butting in more, they should butt out altogether. Every consensual adult union, recognized by government, should be a sex neutral contract filed in probate only for possible future problems that would require unbiased enforcement of contractual rights. A "marriage" certificate should be issued by a religious organization and have no legal authority unless accompanied by a civil union contract. I believe it is wrong to provide or deny any "special" legal options, status, or benefits to anyone. We should all be treated equally as individuals under the law. There should be no marriage benefit or penalty. For the preservation of semantics, avoid the further distortion of our discourse and maintain clarity, I believe same sex unions should adopt or coin a new name, perhaps garriage (no insult intended) if they wish a religious order to recognize their union and one will oblige. If they are proud of their special union why should they not recognize it as such? Marriage has a specific meaning (a union between a man and a woman). http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term... To call a union of any other arrangement the same is to call an apple an orange. I like specificity and clarity. Ambiguity is a road block to understanding and a tool of the obfuscator.| Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 2Posted by edweaver 9 years, 2 months agoGetting government out of 90% of what they got their fingers in is a solution to every problem in this country and I would got out on a limb to say the entire world.| Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 1Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 2 months agoI agree with you, Roy. Well said.| Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
