Never did it occur to me that this would have to be pointed out, but I was arguing with someone about equal marriage rights on another blog, and an anti-gay commenter suggested that, were marriage equality to be the law of the land, the laws would have to be “rewritten” and that his/her marriage would now be simply a “civil marriage,” instead of a “marriage.”
Once I picked my jaw up off the ground, a question dawned on me: Do these people, these “traditional marriage” advocates, somehow think that the government is recognizing their religious marriage? Do they think that the government is granting over a thousand rights and responsibilities because of the ceremony they had in a church?
If so, civics education in the United States is far more of a failure than I previously thought.
A primer, for anyone who is unclear on what should be painfully obvious: As current federal law stands, any consenting man and woman may marry (even if they’re first cousins in some states!), and the government recognizes that based on the signed marriage license. If they choose to have a religious ceremony, it’s not the ceremony that makes the marriage official, it’s the signature on the license, and last time I checked, people’s various conceptions of God aren’t given the power to act as agents of the state! In five states, and soon in the District of Columbia, same-sex couples are included in this system, though not recognized at the federal level.
I truly hope that this is not a revelation and that the majority of anti-gay people understand this, but I suppose it’s always good to make sure. You really never know what set of “facts” or what mangled conception of reality people are working with.
Tags: gay marriage, marriage, marriage equality, marriage law, traditional marriage5 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Please dont ever underestimate the ignorance of the sheeple of the United States. These are the same folks who opposed health care reform because they ‘didnt want the government interfering with their social security’!!!!!!! Bill Maher is right. Americans are stupid!!
Comment by Gary — January 7, 2010 @ 4:02 pm
As Mark Twain said, and I’m paraphrasing:
Imagine an American of average intelligence. Got that picture? Now remember that 50% of them aren’t even THAT smart.
Comment by Evan Hurst — January 7, 2010 @ 4:05 pm
You are basically right, but beware that your statement, “If they choose to have a religious ceremony, it’ not the ceremony that makes the marriage official, it’ the signature on the license,” is not true for all 50 states. Some states have recognized a common-law marriage for legal purposes. Proof of a religious marriage has been cited as evidence in court cases to establish that the marriage actually existed. I haven’t read a newspaper article about a case like this in the last several decades, but I frequently read articles about common-law marriage court cases 40 years ago.
Comment by Thomas Kraemer — January 9, 2010 @ 4:22 pm
No, not only do they know what current marriage laws are. But they never want to discuss historical context and how marriage laws have expanded and become more egalitarian, especially along gender lines.
And for the latter reason, specifically because one’s gender shouldn’t dictate the terms of how one is treated in marriage.
I have also pointed out, that gay couples MEET those current standards and are restricted, BY LAW with the SAME requirements as an op sex couple.
Therefore, marriage and it’s laws and standards AREN’T redefined at ALL.
The COUPLE is. But not to the extent that what they have to adhere to, isn’t recognizable or different for any other COUPLE.
So it’s pure hyperbole from the opposition to keep saying that it’s a redefinition, or extreme change to the laws in any way.
But they are actually the ones who want judges to activate or legislatures to, against the law required for each couple involved.
That is to say, discrimination based on procreation, physical compatibility and gender (and the role of it).
When actually NO judge or legislative body can do that against ANYONE.
Comment by Regan DuCasse — August 4, 2010 @ 12:29 pm
Oops, typo. I meant, ‘not only do they NOT know…’
Comment by Regan DuCasse — August 4, 2010 @ 12:30 pm