Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
BlackDragonShadow
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 03:03:00 -
[1]
In that it's authorized and sanctioned by the government? Technically isn't that a violation of church and state or am I missing something?
Touched by his noodly appendage. Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster |
Atomos Darksun
Damage Incorporated.
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 03:06:00 -
[2]
Legal marriage and religious marriage are two different things.
Also, 0/10.
Originally by: Amoxin My vent is talking to me in a devil voice...
CONVERT TO LINKIFICATION! http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameb |
Sera Ryskin
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 03:07:00 -
[3]
Because, despite the claims of certain morons, the church does not have a monopoly on marriage. A quick 15 minute stop at your local courthouse will, as long as you are one man and one woman, give you the exact same marriage as the most elaborate religious ceremony. Just for the sake of convenience, we allow religious officials as well as judges to do the job, since they're going to have the ceremony anyway. ==========
Merin is currently enjoying a 14 day vacation from the forums. Until she returns, you've got me to entertain you!
|
Seroquel
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 03:28:00 -
[4]
I think his point is why should the government recognize marriages at all? Between having a will and forming a legal contract between those wanting to be married, you could have a marriage without the government's involvement. you can take it to the extreme and say government shouldn't be providing public education or occupational licensing (plumbers, doctors and security guards) which is the stance of the Libertarian party in the U.S.
Originally by: Atomos Darksun Legal marriage and religious marriage are two different things.
Also, 0/10.
(\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination. |
Dong Ninja
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 03:30:00 -
[5]
Tax breaks.
Duh.
|
Dirk Magnum
Royal Hiigaran Navy SCUM.
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 03:37:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 07/04/2009 03:41:18
As a matter of philosophy I don't think that the government should reward marriage, but even if government doesn't reward marriage it still needs to recognize it uniformly. Otherwise in decades' time you'd have multiple groups of people all clamoring for various levels of beneficial recognition for their particular form of self-proclaimed supposedly permanent romantic partnership. We really don't need that headache on top of all the other social issues people insist on injecting into the government sphere (some of which are perfectly warranted but that's just MHO, and of course everyone else's opinion will be at least subtly different.)
|
Amitious Turkey
Gallente Ammo Tech Inc
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 05:13:00 -
[7]
Let me pose two questions:
What is the purpose of government?
And why should government be involved in these kinds of decisions? (\_/) (O.o) (> <) The writer of the article did not quote himself- Cortes |
Victor Valka
Caldari Kissaki Corporation
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 05:37:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Amitious Turkey What is the purpose of government?
Government is (should be) like an OS, doing nothing useful by itself other then providing an environment for others to do so.
That said, current governments take after Windows a lot.
Originally by: Spaztick You are not outnumbered, you are in a target-rich environment.
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 05:49:00 -
[9]
It's sanctioned by government because of history and because it serves an important societal purpose. It isn't a must, but history has developed in a way it is the reality. If it where not called marriage, it would have to be something else.
It is practical in other ways to recognice certain relationships by the larger community. It is also safeguard when things go wrong in a relationship. If you don't have the recognition of larger community to your relationship, you are treated very differently by the law. Even if you had the most intimate relationship ever in private, it means jack **** in dealing with society/law, if you didn't register your relationship. That will mean loss of benefits, restrictions to information and even access to the other person in cases of injury and many many other limitations.
I'm assuming you mean a violation of the separation of state and church with your other question. I don't think marriage serves the exact same purpose for church and state. From a states perspective it is just a registered relationship, that defines how many status/legal issues are treated. For the church it can mean all kinds of weird implications, that don't need to be binding/matter for the law/state. I'm also pretty sure, that the separation of state and church only means the interaction between them is limited in ways and areas the society deems necessary. It doesn't have to be absolute metaphysical separation.
|
Amitious Turkey
Gallente Ammo Tech Inc
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 05:52:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Amitious Turkey Let me pose two questions:
What is the purpose of government?
And why should government be involved in these kinds of decisions?
To answer my own two questions:
Purpose of government: to reward those who do good and punish those who do bad. In terms of the US government, it's following the Constitution to the letter (which they are not doing...) even if that's missing out on some things that would be good to do. In a true nutshell, it's to restrain human beings from going totally bonkers, and to protect those humans from annihilation by outside forces. And, Government is not a god, it is a servant (servant leadership).
second question: Government should not become involved, because the matter of marriage (in my opinion, and the Bible's) is a cultural and religious matter. I never got why judges had that power, can someone explain to me how that came about? (\_/) (O.o) (> <) The writer of the article did not quote himself- Cortes |
|
Crimsonjade
Amarr Secret Service
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 06:02:00 -
[11]
Cause women would revolt if it wasnt. pretty simple tbh
|
Thoma Katch
Gallente University of Caille
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 09:00:00 -
[12]
Originally by: BlackDragonShadow In that it's authorized and sanctioned by the government? Technically isn't that a violation of church and state or am I missing something?
When me and my girlfriend get married its going to have nothing to do with an organised religion. If marriage was simply a decleration of commitment to another person then neither the state or a religious body needs to have anything to do with it. Currently though the government insists on knowing about every minute detail of your life and so have taken it upon themselves to authorise and sanction marriages and divorce.
|
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N. Dara Cothrom
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 09:07:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Amitious Turkey
Originally by: Amitious Turkey Let me pose two questions:
What is the purpose of government?
And why should government be involved in these kinds of decisions?
To answer my own two questions:
Purpose of government: to reward those who do good and punish those who do bad.
No it isn't.
|
zibelthurdos
Concrete Developments
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 13:26:00 -
[14]
legal definition
MARRIAGE - A contract made in due form of law, by which a free man and a free woman reciprocally engage to live with each other during their joint lives, in the union which ought to exist between husband and wife. By the terms freeman and freewoman in this definition are meant, not only that they are free and not slaves, but also that they are clear of all bars to a lawful marriage.
nothing more, nothing less.
it's all about assets and responsibility (medically and financially) it doesn't matter if your pedo uncle lance performs the ceremony as long as he is recognised by the state to sign off on the marriage certificate. ----------------------------------------------- Don't think of it as dying, Think of it as leaving early to avoid the rush |
TimMc
Gallente Brutal Deliverance
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 14:50:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Amitious Turkey Let me pose two questions:
What is the purpose of government?
And why should government be involved in these kinds of decisions?
The Governments job is to stop people ****ing with eachothers lives and setup a Social contract which the majority agree upon.
However it pretty much fails.
And OP, I don't think there should be any legal benefits for marriage or having children. Result? Hopefully marriage goes back to being religious instead of being for tax breaks, and people stop having kids for government aid. I know plenty of people who have children just for the aid, even teenage mothers who did it for the free housing.
|
soldieroffortune 258
Gallente Imperium Forces
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 15:21:00 -
[16]
uh oh, thread has gone political
/locked
Originally by: Xen Gin
Originally by: FOl2TY8
I know that some people like to have voluntary periods of abstinence.
Yeah, I use that excuse too.
|
QuyLe Han
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 16:31:00 -
[17]
You have to go WAAAAY back in history.
The Babbylonians first codified law. All those laws dealt with property right. Women were property. Thus, marriage was a leagal transfer of property from the father to the husband.
Additionally, inheritance passed from Father to sons. Therefore, the father needed to know that his sons were "his". Thus, a marriage contract, and stiff penalties for women violating the marriage. It was only MUCH later. Like 20th century, that these property right and inheritances started to become insignificant.
In that context, there was no reason to recognize same sex "marriages" as no heirs would be produce. Therefore, there is no reason for a contract.
If you want to get married then do, sign the paper and throw the party later.
|
Elora Danzik
Caldari Idiots In Spaceships
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 16:32:00 -
[18]
Originally by: QuyLe Han You have to go WAAAAY back in history.
The Babbylonians first codified law. All those laws dealt with property right. Women were property. Thus, marriage was a leagal transfer of property from the father to the husband.
Additionally, inheritance passed from Father to sons. Therefore, the father needed to know that his sons were "his". Thus, a marriage contract, and stiff penalties for women violating the marriage. It was only MUCH later. Like 20th century, that these property right and inheritances started to become insignificant.
In that context, there was no reason to recognize same sex "marriages" as no heirs would be produce. Therefore, there is no reason for a contract.
If you want to get married then do, sign the paper and throw the party later.
sorry alt post
|
Jago Kain
Amarr Ramm's RDI
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 18:55:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Crimsonjade Cause women would revolt if it wasnt. pretty simple tbh
Meh... I live on Merseyside, where the women have been revolting for as long as I can remember.
___________________________________________________ The game will never be over, because we're keeping the meme alive. |
Jacob Mei
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 21:47:00 -
[20]
Originally by: BlackDragonShadow In that it's authorized and sanctioned by the government? Technically isn't that a violation of church and state or am I missing something?
1. Taxes 2. Tax breaks 3. Marriage can be viewed as a legally binding contract between two individuals in that terms, such as what each partner expects of the union and what are grounds for termination of the union. Do some historical digging and you will soon find that historically marrage was more of a way families made arrangements with one and another, "you give me some of your land and ill give you one of my daughters for your first born son".
If we go by biblical example, the first man and woman, Adam and Eve were technically thrown togeather with no ceremony, whitnesses or what have you. Marrage is a contract, not a religous event. -------------------------------- To borrow a phrase:
Players who post are like stars, there are bright ones and those who are dim.
|
|
Legionos McGuiros
Caldari Novus Aevum Transport and Industries Novus Aevum
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 21:57:00 -
[21]
why does marriage have to be religious?
see i can ask stupid questions 2
|
Amitious Turkey
Gallente Ammo Tech Inc
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 04:38:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Amitious Turkey
Originally by: Amitious Turkey Let me pose two questions:
What is the purpose of government?
And why should government be involved in these kinds of decisions?
To answer my own two questions:
Purpose of government: to reward those who do good and punish those who do bad.
No it isn't.
Okay. Expound. This doesn't help me find the truth in this matter. (\_/) (O.o) (> <) The writer of the article did not quote himself- Cortes |
Taedrin
Gallente Nabaal Engineering of Haarsuk
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 05:27:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Amitious Turkey
Originally by: Amitious Turkey Let me pose two questions:
What is the purpose of government?
And why should government be involved in these kinds of decisions?
To answer my own two questions:
Purpose of government: to reward those who do good and punish those who do bad.
No it isn't.
The purpose of the government is whatever we want it to be, granted that your government is a representative republic like the USA and probably most of the countries in Europe.
|
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N. Dara Cothrom
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 06:21:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Taedrin
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Amitious Turkey
Originally by: Amitious Turkey Let me pose two questions:
What is the purpose of government?
And why should government be involved in these kinds of decisions?
To answer my own two questions:
Purpose of government: to reward those who do good and punish those who do bad.
No it isn't.
The purpose of the government is whatever we want it to be, granted that your government is a representative republic like the USA and probably most of the countries in Europe.
No it isn't.
The purpose of the government is to ensure the continuance of the government. All else is means, not ends.
|
Dirk Magnum
Royal Hiigaran Navy SCUM.
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 07:12:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 08/04/2009 07:17:00
Originally by: Malcanis The purpose of the government is to ensure the continuance of the government. All else is means, not ends.
That's kind of chicken or egg though isn't it?
Every society on Earth has something that functions at least as the germ of government, even if it's only in the form of a haphazard council of elders of a hunter-gatherer band. At the end of the day this council's success is measured by its ability to do its part in keeping the society together and thus providing the people with the associated benefits of such a union. Scaling it up and evolving it a bit you get the bureaucracy of high civilization, where the rewards of effective governance are much higher.
I say that society and government are symbiotic, and each needs to perpetuate each other. When one or the other tries to dominate to an undue degree the balance is thrown off and the civilization collapses. Either party in the arrangement can make this happen by looking only to perpetuate itself, when they'd have best been served by perpetuating their counterpart.
|
Slade Trillgon
Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 10:43:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue I'm also pretty sure, that the separation of state and church only means the interaction between them is limited in ways and areas the society deems necessary. It doesn't have to be absolute metaphysical separation.
Actually Churchs are not subject to taxation, therefore a separtaion of church and state exists so as to not supress religion monitarily. The supposed compromise is that political discussions are supposed to be checked at the church door, but we all know how that has worked.
I am all for the taxation of religious institutions. If theists continue to to take their religious morals into the voting booth, then they are being represented, and therfore owe a share of their institutions "profits" to the governement that protects their rights to try and push their beliefs on others.
Slade
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
Please go sit in the corner, and dont forget to don the shame-on-you-hat!
=v= |
ivar R'dhak
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 12:24:00 -
[27]
The so called religious morals have served society much better, than the current feminist/communist government agenda.
50% divorce rate, 80% initiated by women shows how much women can be trusted with maintaining a marriage.
Government has always been about the wealthy few controlling the masses. _ Mal-`Appears we got here just in a nick of time. What does that make us?¦ Zoe-¦Big damn heroes sir.¦ Mal-¦Aint we just.¦ |
Sera Ryskin
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 13:09:00 -
[28]
Originally by: ivar R'dhak The so called religious morals have served society much better, than the current feminist/communist government agenda.
Err, lol? Have you ever met an actual communist? I can assure you, the current government agenda has only the most superficial resemblance to communism.
Quote: 50% divorce rate, 80% initiated by women shows how much women can be trusted with maintaining a marriage.
Really, lol? Maybe those statistics should make you ask yourself WHY women want a divorce. Maybe it has something to do with attitudes like yours?
PS: I would love to see your statistics to back up this 80% number. Not that I really think you have any, of course, but it would be amusing to watch you try to defend it.
Quote: Government has always been about the wealthy few controlling the masses.
Now that's pretty hilarious, I thought the government was all about communism? ==========
Merin is currently enjoying a 14 day vacation from the forums. Until she returns, you've got me to entertain you!
|
Jacob Mei
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 13:46:00 -
[29]
Originally by: ivar R'dhak The so called religious morals have served society much better, than the current feminist/communist government agenda.
50% divorce rate, 80% initiated by women shows how much women can be trusted with maintaining a marriage.
Government has always been about the wealthy few controlling the masses.
Statstitiscs are such a beautiful thing, 85% of them can be made to say anything. -------------------------------- To borrow a phrase:
Players who post are like stars, there are bright ones and those who are dim.
|
|
CCP Navigator
C C P
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 14:35:00 -
[30]
Please refrain from political discussions in OOPE.
Locked.
Navigator Senior Community Representative CCP Games, Create a petition on a forum issue. |
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |