US Constitutional Amendment on Marriage
There is a lot of agitation about ‘gay’ marriage today.
Let me make another proposal or two. Let’s look at what marriage is, what role it plays in the life of the community and nation, and how it affects the individuals married.
Marriage seems to be either about religion (or used to be), tax status, or children. With the legal aspects of marriage today, easy marriage and court-involved dissolution, failure of rule-of-law to protect marriage, and the fact that worldwide our ‘one woman, one man’ form is only one of several.
Marriage licenses are issued to most that asked, once certain legal requirements are met, or appear to be met: Age of consent is about the only restriction, unless one or both partners lie. Any marriage can be dissolved by divorce with adequate funds, where historically only abandonment was available. Society has decided to stop enforcing laws relating to adultery and other violations of the marriage vows made to state and partner.
I fail to see that the federal or state governments, responding to the will of the people, really care about ‘the sanctity’ of marriage. When was the last divorce denied? Adultery prosecution? One of the most *active* types of ‘dating’ websites and ’swingers’ networks is married women. As I understand the crime of adultery, it is a married adult engaging in sex with an adult they are not married to. Landlords have been prosecuted for denying housing to couples known to be ‘cohabiting’. Where is the interest in the ’sanctity’ of marriage?
Marriages are performed as religious ceremonies. Sometimes. Others are performed by civil servants, captains of vessels at sea, etc. Where is the universal, religious definition of marriage? The state recognizes a religious ceremony (with filing of state marriage license), and the church recognizes the state divorce decree. Why do churches recognize state decrees of divorce, which ‘undo’ a religious ceremony? Is marriage fundamentally, or even apparently, a religious relationship. I question this aspect of marriage. A lot. I also have questions about ‘the wedding at Canaan’ where Jesus was said to turn water to wine. Nothing is said about how many adults were involved in that wedding — multiple wives was common at that time, often a measure of wealth. Where do the records clearly identify that the bride was the first for the groom, or the last? Why is this event used to posit the Italian Merchant Prince practice of one woman, one man, used to establish lines of inheritance for merchant empires?
Of course, you can guess my position. Marriage is about making babies. And about tax status.
So I recommend choosing. Either define marriage is between ‘adults with children’, or ‘adults intending to mingle tax status’. I refuse to believe that the entire world, outside of the US, can tolerate the presence of marriages with more than two partners, and the US would cease to exist, children and wives abused, and Wall Street would collapse if permitted here.
Utah, and the Church of Latter Day Saints (the Mormons) are a dirty ’secret’ for the rest of the nation. This is abysmal. People were killed in the 1800’s because of their ability to envision and live a lifestyle, successfully, that included multiple wives. Remember, the nation, the community, and many churches require of citizens: “Make babies.” Making and raising babies responsibly is why, I believe, governments get into marriage. Governments stay involved in marriage to defend property rights. Whether the practice of polygamy is still practiced by Mormons, in Utah or elsewhere, is their business, not a perversion for others to snigger about. Any thriving household with care for all is to be admired.
For me the choice is clear — either marriage is about making babies, and children are going to have to be present (or a physician’s affidavit of pregnancy) to be valid, or it is about tax status. For the good of the nation and the community I see no value in discerning between couples or other groups of adult if fertility isn’t evaluated.
If one were to truly believe marriage were ’sacred’, we would see cohabitation prosecuted, we would see adultery and abandonment prosecuted, instead we see these marriage-destructive practices protected in the courts.
Really.
Brad K.