Is it a Marriage?
Is it a Union? Does it matter?
Mom and dad were 'married.' They stood before a Justice of the peace
exchanged vows with one another. They proclaimed their undying love for
another. They exchanged rings. And by the 'power' vested in him, were
pronounced husband and wife. A photo of the newlyweds was taken and
went home together.
What actually took place during the marriage ceremony and what
they have to get a deity to bless their joining? No, the 'power' vested
the presiding Justice was given by the State, not a deity. Did they
any sexual activity between them as the basis of their marriage? No,
knew the roles of their sexual activities and there was never a
to who did what. Did they have to worry if the other would be able to
into a hospital room to be by their spouse's side should that ever
issue? No, the benefit of a spouse is understood to be there at
anywhere, anyhow. Did they have to worry if they could be parents?
Afterwards they probably had some differing opinions about being
but it never crossed their mind that they couldn't raise a family due
government regulations and restrictions. Did they have to worry if
marriage license would be recognized elsewhere other than in which the
they got married? No, it was a viable document granted by a
official, thus binding throughout the world. Did they have to be
with the future of the other spouse should anything happen if one were
alone? No, they had no concern about such things as it was a non-issue.
With all the controversy surrounding the ideas of marriage versus civil
unions, I felt it was my personal privilege to include this topic in my
journal on my own domain. I do not intend to offend anyone, but
shed some extra light which may not be considered otherwise to the
importance of legalizing gay marriages.
Is marriage completely defined
anywhere outside of 'Christian-based'
and are there different interpretations? Is a marriage strictly a "Christian" institution
afforded only to those who follow the
so, then Buddhists, Atheists, nor anyone who doesn't follow Christ
marry and are hereby granted a legal divorce (their marriage was never
anyway?). Is marriage a right of every human being? Should everyone be
eligible for marriage? (I should be so lucky! haha)
Some gay couples have taken advantage
of Vermont's "Civil Union" answer
have a state recognize their relationships. However, the "Union" is
non-transferable across state lines. Is Vermont the Gay State by
Heavens no! California, Florida, Texas, New York... all these have
gay populations than Vermont. Why then, is there only one state willing
afford gay couples even a "Civil Union"? And does the Civil Union mean
same thing as marriage?
The U.S. Supreme Court, in their recent ruling regarding the Texas
laws, has in essence validated gay relationships. They chose to leave
bedroom to the conduct and behavior of the consenting adults residing
within. However, even this is a far cry from the benefits that a
recognized 'marriage' provides.
Consider the questions at the beginning of this entry. The marriage
recognized by a state is not required to be recognized by God, as this
enable a conflict of Church and State (may that never be!). Thus, the
has its view of marriage as an institution and ordinance spiritually
in their respective faiths. However, all faiths do not believe the
Thus the government should provide an answer to this problem.
No, I am not proposing marriage to anyone specifically (not yet, it's
legal for me to do so to anyone I am interested in marrying!). But here
my answer to the whole gay/hetero marriage issue.
If a couple wishes to marry who are seeking a 'spiritually grounded'
the Baptists or Catholics for example, then their 'marriage' is
by the State and their respective religious affiliations as they see
are not asking religious organizations to give us their blessing- we
If a couple, non-spiritually minded, chooses to marry, the State
affiliates are not involved at all) has an obligation to recognize
marriage with the same fortitude as they do of a traditional
marriage - thus permitting gay marriages. Religious organizations will
judge and jury over the way they choose to recognize 'marriages' within
their own bounds, but the Federal Government would recognize all
for all practical purposes.
The word Marriage and the U.S. Government
The word 'marriage' is used throughout
U.S. and State laws. The term is
not "civil union." It's "marriage." Thus, awarding a gay couple a "civil
is sidestepping the benefits of the letter of the law. Thus gay
must be recognized as a "marriage" under the law, and not a "union." It
would be hideous to have to alter ALL the laws regarding "marriage" and
footnote them with "civil unions." Thus, the word "marriage" is vitally
important when it comes to gays. Civil Unions are not even as important
"common law marriages."
As a single gay male who cherishes
the comfort and stability of a relationship, I am personally disturbed that
should I meet the man of
dreams and fall in love, that I cannot be granted the same benefits
heterosexual friends who are "legally" married according to the S\state
It's no big deal people! Being gay is not contagious. If we are married
recognized legally, it is not going to be the end of the world! What's
Now, can I get married please?
This journal entry may also be found on the archives page of
Copyright © 2004 by the author
All Rights Reserved
| Our Mission | What
We Believe | FAQ | Issues
| Prayer Requests | TeleSeminars | Daily Devotions | Religion Dispatch Blog | Audio Whosoever | Whosoever Podcast | Resources
| Letters To The Editor | Reverent
Responses | Seeds of Hope | Reader
Survey | Bookstore
| Contact Us