The Role of Government Regarding Marriage

I can see a need to limit the number of people the government recognizes as being in a marriage for taxation and economic reasons. Beyond that, I think Separation of Church & State limits the state's interest since the concept of marriage originates in religious beliefs. Also, there are various religions which hold many different tenets regarding marriage, some actually opposing, so the state can not further any interest regarding marriage without violating Separation of Church & State and basically imposing one religion's beliefs upon another's.

Living in AZ for over 20 years, I've had several Mormom friends & neighbors. They are good people. There are many denominations and some of them are in plural marriages. While that's not my cup of tea, it works for them. I don't see why they can't legally marry according to their beliefs. The state may wish to limit how many people in the marriage they recognize as being married- but they should be able to marry as many as they wish. Likewise, gay people have churches that do not believe that homosexuality is a sin, & religious leaders who wish to marry them. Yet, the government favors one set of religious beliefs over the other? It has no secular reason to support these laws. No economic rationale to support them.

The government's recognition of marriage should be limited to it's secular & economic interests. It should not favor one religious belief over another. The government's role is to establish an environment in which all different kinds of people, with different religious beliefs, can live freely and peacefully amongst each other, without favoring one religious belief over another.

"The establishment clause has generally been interpreted to prohibit 1) the establishment of a national religion by Congress, or 2) the preference of one religion over another or the support of a religious idea with no identifiable secular purpose." http://www.uslaw.com/us_law_dictionary/e/Establishment+Clause

The government has no secular or economic interests regarding marriage beyond limiting the number of people involved that it recognizes. The only reasons left for these laws are religious.

Yet, we have laws against polygamy and homosexual marriages. So much for "rendering unto Caesar..."

It Boggles the Mind

It boggles the mind:

We can support over 700 military bases in countries we have no business being in, but not health care.

We can send millions and billions of dollars to other countries to help them out, but we resent helping our own.

We can fund a war but not a proper educational system.

We can go from having a surplus to a tremendous deficit in less than 10 years.

Only 5% of the American population control 90% of the countries wealth, but they resent not being able to have it all.

We can export our jobs yet call people lazy for not having one.

We have a number of people who are suppose to be working for the good of the people of the country but are only looking out for corporate interests and their own.

We gave corporations legal status and power as individuals without also giving them legal responsibilities toward the communities and societies within which they operate and toward their employees.

Why is anyone having to go without medical care in the United States in this day and age?

We can fund war and death but not life?

There's something seriously wrong here.

Banning Gay Marriage Is Wrong

Why does it matter to the state which two people are married? Suppose we took all the gay couples and lined them up boy-girl and married them. No one would think twice. But, if we put them back as they couples they are-- the same people would be married. I can see the state being interested in the number of people they recognize as married, but I fail to see how or why the state should care which two.

And if there are churches -- legally recognized religious institutions who have broken away from the mainstream churches -- not cults, not religions that have sprung up overnight and are not legally recognized -- whose religious beliefs hold that homosexuality is not a sin, with legally recognized religious leaders that wish to marry homosexuals (and there are!) -- I fail to see how we can possibly consider imposing mainstream religious beliefs upon them. Doesn't that violate both Freedom of Religion and Separation of Church and State?

Religious beliefs and personal opinions aside, banning gay marriage is wrong.

Christ's Most Radical (and difficult) Commandment

The commandment to love your enemies may be Christ's most difficult commandment. With the torture debate raging across America, this article addresses the question of whether we should follow Christ's teachings only when it is safe and easy, or all the time.

read more | digg story

Antifungal drug can prove helpful for asthma patients, study

According to a British study, itraconazole (an antifungal medicine) may prove helpful for those patients with sever asthma who are also sensitive to some fungi.

read more | digg story

Bush Admin Officials Will Be "Indicted For War Crimes"

Media coverage of the disclosure of the "torture memo" authored by Bush Justice Department official John C. Yoo has been mostly a deafening silence. But on this morning's Chris Matthews' show........

read more | digg story

Cardboard box wins UK green contest

Via SkyNews: This is the £50,000 winner of a contest to find the world's greenest invention - a solar-powered oven made from cardboard. The cooker took the FT Climate Change Challenge crown after beating 300 other creations, including a...

read more | digg story