Tuesday, December 09, 2008

Societies have a right to define marriage

Do societies have a right to define marriage? I'd say we do. We want the ability to decide the ritual - where to get married, how, and what format. Over the years it has modernised, including all the digital technology of our time. Why not make it also relevant to the people getting married.

Personally I have a problem with two people standing in a church because this is prescribed, when these people haven't been to church for decades perhaps.
clipped from news.yahoo.com
In the December 15 issue of Newsweek (on newsstands December 8),


Leading social conservatives blasted Newsweek for its current cover story, "The Religious Case for Gay Marriage," which they said misinterprets both biblical scripture and their own political movement.


“Religious objections to gay marriage are rooted not in the Bible at all, then, but in custom and tradition,” Miller writes. “The Bible was written for a world so unlike our own, it’s impossible to apply its rules, at face value, to ours.”


“The arguments that are used are often not biblical arguments. They are secular arguments, arguing about marriage as being a civic and a social institution, and that societies have a right to define marriage,” Land said. Broadening the definition of marriage could “shatter” the social role married couples have traditionally played, he said.

 blog it

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Personally, I think it's ridiculous
to "take oaths before god" and then forget about that promise when people want to divorce each other.
Maybe it's time the wording was changed a little, after all, marriage, amongst other things, isnt what it was all those many years ago.

Anonymous said...

I don't think people forget the "oaths" they made when they divorce! "Til death do us part" must not be taken literally. If the relationship dies, then the couple must part!