Trinidad Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 I don't object to any of this. I'd even go so far as to call it a good idea...However, I wouldn't call this set of legal responsibilities a marriage (regardless of whether it is being issued to a man and a woman, two women, or three guys and a wombat) I view this system as being significantly different from the existing standard here in the United States, both for heterosexuals and for homosexuals.Part of the reason to chose an expression other than "marriage" is indicate that this is separate and distinct from what came before.I understand that, and from your American perspective you see "religious" as before and "secular" as after. After all, christianity in the US is as old as the US itself, isn't it? But marriages go back much longer than our modern religions. They were there first. Then they obtained a place within the various religions. And after that religions tried to make it look as if they owned the monopoly on marriage. Native Americans did get married long before christianity reached the US, didn't they? Rik 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 However, I wouldn't call this set of legal responsibilities a marriage (regardless of whether it is being issued to a man and a woman, two women, or three guys and a wombat)In the Netherlands you have "Partnership contracts" and you have "registered partnership", both of which are light-weight marriage-like contracts. But you also have marriage, which is a concept that has been around for thousands of years and exists in all cultures. Which is in itself a big advantage. Foreign authorities know what it means. I think these alien concepts of "registered partnership" create some confusion. Foreign authorities, and even some locals maybe, could be confused about what it means. Are my "partner"'s children also my children, for example. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Religions are good at hijacking pre-existing customs. It is no coincidence that we celebrate Christmas on or around the winter solstice. Marriage originally existed in order to secure family land and property for generations of linear descent. Until, that it is, it became some kind of pandering to (a) God. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmat Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fc%2Fa%2F2011%2F07%2F06%2FBALT1K72UL.DTL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted July 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 8, 2011 Native Americans did get married long before christianity reached the US, didn't they? RikLong before that, Abraham and Sarah were married, but I think Adam and Eve were just shackin'. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted July 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 8, 2011 So, which jackass preacher will be the first to say this is punishment for that gay marriage thing? http://www.cnycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=637040#.ThM7osB29jk.facebook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtvesuvius Posted July 8, 2011 Report Share Posted July 8, 2011 So, which jackass preacher will be the first to say this is punishment for that gay marriage thing? http://www.cnycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=637040#.ThM7osB29jk.facebook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.