The term marriage broadly means a blending of two separate entities into one. The difficulty we are having with the term marriage might be from the biblical interpretation - that the only acceptable reason for marriage is procreation, therefore only two individuals of the opposite sex should be allowed to marry. Since it makes an exception for heterosexual couples who are sterile, it blatantly discriminates against gay people.
Perhaps we could resolve this by recognizing two marriages. The first, a Civil Marriage, currently referred to as a civil union. This marriage would be available to any two unmarried individuals. The second, a Religious Marriage, performed by a priest, minister, rabbi or imam. In this marriage the religious institution would determine the requirements according to its precepts and beliefs.
Religious and Civil Marriages would be legally identical in every way except for where and by whom the marriage service was performed. Perhaps in this way we can respect the feelings and beliefs of both sides of this controversy.
But maybe it's just me.
1 comment:
I completely agree with you and I'd wager 99% of the LGBT community does as well (however, I can't speak for them).
I don't know any rational person who would argue that we should force churches/religious organizations to perform same-sex marriages.
However, as you said, my partner and I should be allowed to enter into a civil marriage in any state and have it be recognized as such by the local, state and federal governments.
Thanks for your response to my letter. Please consider forwarding your article to RI legislators.
Rory Merritt
Post a Comment