Du siehst [info]oblivionbystarss Journal

Vorhergehendes | Nächstes

Writer's Block: Church and State

  • 4. Jan 2009 at 3:29 PM
marx sickle

Today in 1893 U.S. President Benjamin Harrison declared full amnesty for Mormon polygamists. Is it the government's place to define which marriages are valid and which are not?

View Answers



Yes.

If you just read the one-word answer above, I'll bet right now you're thinking that I'm for banning gay marriage, for saying that 'marriage is only valid between a small section of the population'. But I think that since religion can influence what the government does, even though it shouldn't be able to, then the government should be able to influence what religion does.

I believe that the government should declare any marriage between consenting adults legal, no matter how many consenting adults there are, or what genders, ethnicities, or anything else you care to mention that they are of. But I believe that government safeguards are needed to stop damaging types of relationships from being legal - adults marrying children, forced marriages, incestuous marriages. If the goverment said that any form of partnership between anyone whatsoever was fine, then although only a tiny number of people would abuse the law, it'd make a number of unpleasant things rather more easy to access.

That said, that relies on the government being a sensible one, that will legalise all forms of marriage between consenting adults. Which we really don't have at the moment. But... in an ideal world, it would be government-regulated, albeit loosely.

Comments

( 4 Kommentare — Kommentar hinterlassen )
[info]yoursforever_me wrote:
4. Jan 2009 16:14 (UTC)
i...mostly agree.
i think consenting adults should be able to marry who they want when they want etc.
but in some ways they're there to protect people. say you married someone and you thought you were in a committed monogomous relationship then you discovered when they were supposedly commuting elsewhere for work they were leading a double life amrried to someone else also? it's not really fair on either of the spouses that thought there was a happy committed marriage. and whislt the perosn in the middle might love and be committed to each of the people they're married to, the other person won't see it that way.
but in all honesty that happens anyways, so maybe people should be able to marry who they want provided they're all consensuel and stuff.
[info]oblivionbystars wrote:
4. Jan 2009 18:14 (UTC)
Well, that's my point about as many consenting adults as possible - if they all consent to it and know what they're consenting to, they should be free to do it. You shouldn't be able to marry two people and have one of them not know about the other, but if everyone knows, it should be fine.
[info]yoursforever_me wrote:
4. Jan 2009 21:19 (UTC)
oh, fair enough then!
(Anonym) wrote:
5. Jan 2009 20:26 (UTC)
oh wow
I think I *may* have outsmarted xkcd
*goes to check*
I DID!!
( 4 Kommentare — Kommentar hinterlassen )

Profile

marx sickle
[info]oblivionbystars
starlit oblivion
I know 81 places, and counting. It's possibly not healthy.

Latest Month

Februar 2009
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728

Tags

Gehostet von LiveJournal.com
Designed by Terri McAllister