How would you define Marriage?

[bhsup]

How would you define Marriage?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSCz70NVPOY

 

[IglooDame]

Two or more consenting adults that have their union consecrated by the religious authority of their choice.

 

[scherbchen]

the legal (!) union of two people (any combination of man and/or woman). Through this union they are family. Their in-laws are now extended family (bringing with it all the ramifications of inheritances and being a legal guardian and foster parent in the case of unforseen circumstances). They get the full benefit the state has to offer a married couple. They get the full protection. Any child conceived or adopted by them is considered a full member of said family.

Quite simple, really... although I am sure I missed something.

 

[mitsho]

On the other hand, this is also about money and opens the door to lawsuits. If gays can marry then they can sue people who dont treat them like they're married. A business with a gay employee who wants marriage benefits for his/her "spouse" may be looking at an equal rights gripe when the practice ostensibly exists to help employees starting families.

- There are many young married couples that don't have kids.
- Procreation isn't the only form of getting children, adoption is another way that might from time to time be even better!
- Thus, there is actually no big difference between homosexual or heterosexual couples in that way, homosexual women "even" get their own (biological) kids.

Can you point me to the problem here of 'homosexuals' abusing "family-helping" laws?

As for the question. In my opinion, the Danish old version posted here above sounds quite reasonable (having loved someone for so and so long... ). Legally, it's a whole different matter and changes from border to border, be it national or subnational, and from "culture" (whatever that might be) to "culture". Thus, no definite answer can be made. Point.

 

[Masquerouge]

A business transaction. Marriage today has reverted back to when 10 goats got you a wife. Its all about the money. Taxes are the only real reason the gov. regulates "love".

And badly, at that. I'm still a little miffed about paying more taxes now that I file jointly with my wife than when we filed separately.

 

[skadistic]

And badly, at that. I'm still a little miffed about paying more taxes now that I file jointly with my wife than when we filed separately.

See why I'm not married.

Sucker

 

[Lotus49]

Marriage = Holy union of a man and a woman before the eyes of God & society. The 'legal' mumbo-jumbo is secondary, only to practically ratify the union and integrate it appropriately into the society.

Everything else is just 'hangin' out together', and 'makin' babies'. And of course, everyone is trying to scam their way into lower taxes, and other benefits.

 

[scherbchen]

what is bad about making babies (and / or adopting them)? aren't we in an age where there are (supposedly) not enough kids to pay everbodys retirement? mind you, I see kids all over the place, but that is always a big argument...

PS: I do not believe in a God, so I can't get married either, right?

 

[IglooDame]

what is bad about making babies (and / or adopting them)? aren't we in an age where there are (supposedly) not enough kids to pay everbodys retirement? mind you, I see kids all over the place, but that is always a big argument...

PS: I do not believe in a God, so I can't get married either, right?

Sure you can - if you don't believe in a higher power, then that part of the marriage definition is null for you.

 

[Lotus49]

what is bad about making babies (and / or adopting them)? aren't we in an age where there are (supposedly) not enough kids to pay everbodys retirement? mind you, I see kids all over the place, but that is always a big argument...

There's nothing stopping you from doing whatever you like, along these lines. In fact it sounds quite generous of you.

PS: I do not believe in a God, so I can't get married either, right?

That sort of goes without saying. But, as it would turn out... you can indeed still obtain a piece of paper (the afore mentioned 'legal mumbo-jumbo'), and the law of the land will consider you as 'married'. Yet it is completely hollow before the eyes of God.

It's like saying, "I'm going to go and be baptized today, so I can be cleansed of my sins. Oh, yeah... I mean, I don't believe in God or anything like that! LOL! -I just want some peace of mind. Hey... can't hurt! Right!"

If all you want is the piece of paper, them I'm sure you can find a way of obtaining it. You asked for my definition of marriage, and I gave it to you. But what laws men write... that is another matter. Though there is Holy and unholy... yet if it makes no difference to you, then take your piece of paper, go and be happy.

 

[Red Door]

A union between two consenting adults.

 

[ohcrapitsnico]

Two or more consenting adults that have their union consecrated by the religious authority of their choice.

I would agree but I would think most religious authority would not consecrate marriages between homosexuals.

 

[IglooDame]

I would agree but I would think most religious authority would not consecrate marriages between homosexuals.

And that's pretty much an issue between God, the religious authority, and their flock (including the homosexual couple). It's not my business, and it certainly isn't the government's business.

 

[Lotus49]

And that's pretty much an issue between God, the religious authority, and their flock (including the homosexual couple). It's not my business, and it certainly isn't the government's business.

But it is the government's business when you're talking about licenses, laws, taxes, etc. I think the best way to solve this, is to just remove the legal aspect from society completely. Marriage would ONLY exist in the form of the Holy union I described above. If this were the case, you wouldn't have everybody and his brother trying to hack away at it.

So, we're just going to have to cede all legal aspects of marriage, and it should solely become a religious institution. Sort of like communion... or confession. You don't see a bunch of gays and atheists stomping their fists in order to get some bread & wine, or step into the booth and talk to a priest, do you?

Thus, we must take down the farce that has become 'civil marriage' - out of the picture. It can be massively downgraded to some kind of simplistic 'guardian' or 'caretaker' status, for the purpose of raising children (identifying a legal guardian). But no benefits. Nothing beyond that.

Then, these people will retract their claws. Because simply put, they will not be happy until they've pissed in others' Cheerios. So, I say we throw the bowl out - down the sink, and just eat out of the box.

 

[IglooDame]

But it is the government's business when you're talking about licenses, laws, taxes, etc. I think the best way to solve this, is to just remove the legal aspect from society completely. Marriage would ONLY exist in the form of the Holy union I described above. If this were the case, you wouldn't have everybody and his brother trying to hack away at it.

So, we're just going to have to cede all legal aspects of marriage, and it should solely become a religious institution. Sort of like communion... or confession. You don't see a bunch of gays and atheists stomping their fists in order to get some bread & wine, or step into the booth and talk to a priest, do you?

Thus, we must take down the farce that has become 'civil marriage' - out of the picture. It can be massively downgraded to some kind of simplistic 'guardian' or 'caretaker' status, for the purpose of raising children (identifying a legal guardian). But no benefits. Nothing beyond that.

Then, these people will retract their claws. Because simply put, they will not be happy until they've pissed in others' Cheerios. So, I say we throw the bowl out - down the sink, and just eat out of the box.

We are in fundamental agreement - but the "religious institution of marriage" is still a grey area. If two atheists feel that they want 'marriage', then exchanging vows and trading rings in a ceremony attended by relatives and friends (presided over by someone they and their community respect) is just as much a marriage as the Christian, Jewish, or any other religious version of it. I mean, does a Christian tell a Muslim couple "oh, you're not really married" because other Muslims have polygamous marriages? No religion has the platform to decide what standards other religions get to set, and thus the atheistic sort of non-religious marriage (though still not particularly noticed by the government) is also in the mix.

 

[Ansar]

A union between two consenting adults.

(XCL)

 

[Lotus49]

We are in fundamental agreement - but the "religious institution of marriage" is still a grey area. If two atheists feel that they want 'marriage', then exchanging vows and trading rings in a ceremony attended by relatives and friends (presided over by someone they and their community respect) is just as much a marriage as the Christian, Jewish, or any other religious version of it. I mean, does a Christian tell a Muslim couple "oh, you're not really married" because other Muslims have polygamous marriages? No religion has the platform to decide what standards other religions get to set, and thus the atheistic sort of non-religious marriage (though still not particularly noticed by the government) is also in the mix.

People can do whatever they want, but the simple fact is that there is such a thing as 'the spirit of the law', and marriage laws in our country (and others like it) did not have these certain... 'scenes' that we see in States which have allowed it in mind, when they were written.

That's why these people get such a kick out of doing it. It's almost like some kind of publicity stunt for them. They're basically disrespecting/disgracing the fabric of their society, and they know it. They feel they've been mistreated and/or alienated, so - to heck... now WE'RE taking some ground back, by gosh. Then they hide 'innocently' behind these statements about 'legality'.

They have no consideration for the institution they are encroaching upon, and they know full well what they are doing. And I don't kind it's 'cute'. They do, though.

I guess we'll just have to fight fire with fire. I'm an expert in that. I'll figure out a way to disgrace their gay pride parades, by holding one of my own, which completely mocks theirs, goodstyle. See how they like it...

Rainbows for everybody, man. We're all going to put rainbows - on every bumper, in every window, etc. We're just gonna cheapen everything they stand for.

 

[GuitarHero]

Marriage is when to people beleive that they are right for each other as mates. They then blow a wad of cash so some old fart says some crap to them and declares them mates. Then, they yell at each other until they waste more money so they can perform the same process with other people.

 

[Traitorfish]

The exclusive legal union of two adult human beings. I don't think gender should figure into it, and if people want to come up with some additional religous union, that's fine, but that's there own business.

 

[skadistic]

and thus the atheistic sort of non-religious marriage (though still not particularly noticed by the government) is also in the mix.

Boat captains, judges, justice of the peace and other "lay people" who have by law been given the ability to marry people can and do marry people in non-religious ceremonies. These are not called civil unions but just marriage. It is legal and the licenses are just the same as the couple that gets hitched in a church by a priest.

Married under the law with out a single shred of religion.