Quote:
Originally Posted by MissBrattified
If couples want to file taxes together via a civil union, I really don't care.
|
Here's a libertarian idea... WHY give special tax benefits to "married" or "uninoned" couples that are not available to "unmarried" or "un-unioned" couples??? What makes that private arrangement so special that the GOVERNMENT should treat two citizens differently???
Libertarian answer... treat each citizen alike. Period. No special perks for couples married or not. Perhaps a deduction for children in a house hold (married or unmarried) but that's it.
Quote:
|
Marriage is a religious institution and should have remained in the jurisdiction of the church. The church should have 100% control over marriage and weddings and the government should be involved only when the couple chooses to involve it for legal protection or benefits.
|
Ah... but that was where the problem originated. The Catholic Church enforced Catholic dogma through civil law (marriage of church and state here). They deemed any wedding outside of Catholic authority was an illicit marriage. Therefore, they made the priest an agent of the state to bear witness to the union and required all marriages to be performed before a Catholic priest to be considered valid. When the Protestants broke from the Catholic Church... they left the state in charge of marriage. Both Catholics and Protestants alike used civil government to issue marriage licenses to keep people from marrying other races, religions, second wives (if the divorce was unbiblical), and partners outside of their class.
I like the Quakers. They have a really libertarian idea about marriage. First, they believe that marriage is strictly between a couple and God. They have no "clergy" to officiate marriages. A couple simply declares their intentions to marry and during a service they pledge their love and speak their vows to one another. And it's done. Those in attendance sign the marriage certificate as witnesses of the event so that they have documentation among their faith community. Quakers are also known for not seeking a state marriage license or registering their marriages with the state. Remember, they were persecuted... they strongly believe in separation of church and state. Quakers who do not get legally married in the eyes of the state get legal counsel for name changes, wills, and powers of attorney to secure the legal rights they feel they might want.
In the Bible marriage was simple. First, if the bride were a minor her father's permission was needed and at least two witnesses were necessary to establish the union as valid in their faith community. If both were minors the marriage was arranged. If adults... they simply declared their intentions to marry before at least two witnesses (typically the family was present for both the betrothal and the wedding).
So, as a Christian Libertarian, I believe that marriage shouldn't be under the authority of the government or the church. Marriage should be a private social arrangement between individual people and families. It belongs to the doman of individuals in the case of two adults... and to the domain of the family if minors (for example both are 16 years old in a state wherein age of consent is 16).
Quote:
|
Gay couples already live together; people seem to forget that sometimes. If civil unions were allowed, it wouldn't suddenly allow gay couples to share households and beds--they already do that. It allows them to file taxes jointly and have other tax benefits.
|
I agree. But again, why should any select grouping of couples get special tax benefits not afforded to other couples??? Is it really the state's business if they are "married" or not?
Quote:
|
The real problem here is that the church, marriage and weddings have gotten tangled up with the government and its benefits and requirements. The two need to be separated and involving the government in relationships needs to be voluntary--not mandatory.
|
I agree. And apparently... so do 45% of American couples who choose to cohabitate instead of seeking civil marriages. The reason why so many don't want to marry is because of all the legality, governmental intrusions, and entanglements. Many times these cohabitating couples wear rings and introduce one another as husband and wife to avoid stigma. Many consider themselves "married in the eyes of God" and not the state. In a way... their conceptualization is much like that of the Quakers. Government free marriage. It's private. Their union is private... and should they "divorce" the dissolution of the marriage is private. No courts necessary unless there is a dispute over property or children. But if all are in agreement and civil... it's taken care of privately.
I've shared this before. Here's a video of a couple marrying in a self-officiating "Quaker Wedding" (Quaker fashion, though I don't think they are of the Quaker faith).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ae8fmy4oGg
Linear Mode
