• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Alabama takes interesting approach to marrige

Wrangor

Wrangor

Go Deacs
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
12,413
Reaction score
1,376
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/09/bill_to_eliminate_marriage_lic.html

If I am reading this correctly, Alabama is getting out of marriage game. This is pretty much what I have been advocating for sometime. It's almost hard for me to believe that Alabama is close to doing this. Let the state record the union/marriage but get out of the business of 'consecrating' it. Societies only grow more liberal over time and so if you are a conservative you don't want the government defining marriage for you. A libertarian approach is much better.

Thoughts? Am I missing something here?

Mods - can you correct the spelling in the title?
 
Last edited:
sometimes you kind of forget that Alabama has so few problems to deal with that their legislature can spend quality time finding ways to keep gay people from getting married
 
I'm fine with it, but I'm not surprised Alabama is doing it. They lost so they're taking their ball and going home.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
I'm fine with it, but I'm not surprised Alabama is doing it. They lost so they're taking their ball and going home.
Click to expand...

I'm also fine with them taking their ball and going home. It preempts potential problems from rogue probate judges, and it beats the hell out of more silly court challenges.
 
Separation of church and state? Nah, it'll never work.
 
Wrangor said:
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/09/bill_to_eliminate_marriage_lic.html

If I am reading this correctly, Alabama is getting out of marriage game. This is pretty much what I have been advocating for sometime. It's almost hard for me to believe that Alabama is close to doing this. Let the state record the union/marriage but get out of the business of 'consecrating' it. Societies only grow more liberal over time and so if you are a conservative you don't want the government defining marriage for you. A libertarian approach is much better.

Thoughts? Am I missing something here?

Sorry for the misspell on the title. Typing on tapa.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure you are reading it correctly. That is the way local news outlets have been presenting it. I am typically extremely liberal (Nader voter, Kucinich supporter, Sanders voter), But I do see this libertarian approach as best. Marriage is really a religious concept (e.g., in the catholic church marriage is considered a sacrament along with receiving communion, receiving holy orders, offering confession, etc.) that the government institutionalized by giving tax incentives to couples to promote nuclear families. But that approach becomes sketchy in the public sector with respect to the equal protections clause when certain types of couples are prohibited from accessing the tax incentives. The simplest solution to the angst over gay marriage would be for governments to end the institutionalization of marriage, and leave the definition of marriage up to religious entities. Religious groups are free to discriminate against (i.e. not allow them to marry) anyone that doesn't follow their rules/beliefs, and the State can offer tax incentives to couples that form civil unions if the state wants to.

As an aside, it is also really hard for any State where the conservative governor is under criminal investigation for corruption to use state resources to facilitate and cover-up an extra marital affair, to continue to stand firmly by their self righteous and religiously motivated position that a marriage is strictly defined as one man and one woman.
 
Last edited:
Agreed.
 
Yeah the concept of marriage predates Christianity/Judaism/modern religion and goes back in some form at least 10,000 years.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Yeah the concept of marriage predates Christianity/Judaism/modern religion and goes back in some form at least 10,000 years.
Click to expand...

51EBRkZuifL._SX940_.jpg
 
Thank God they saved us from the asteroids and fought them off. #blessed #ripdinosaurs
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Yeah the concept of marriage predates Christianity/Judaism/modern religion and goes back in some form at least 10,000 years.
Click to expand...

So, 10,000 years ago, couples began established long term monogamous relationships that were sanctioned by the state or local governments, there were no spiritual/religious ceremonies marking the initiation of such relationships, and those non-existent ceremonies were not derived from and based religious concepts and beliefs, and there were no spiritual or religious motivations/rewards for establishing these relationships. The relationships were purely contractual and state driven concepts used by non-religious authority figures to promote societal norms, establish property rights and inheritance, and they used the word marriage to describe this concept? New information to me thanks, everyone.

(BTW, "Christianity/Judaism/modern religion" were not first religions, so just because something predates modernity, does not mean it does not have a religious origin.)
 
Seems like a whole bunch of trouble and hoops to jump though because of religion and its requisite hand-wringing over issues of sex. The state must show recognition of marriage for legal purposes. You people are still just arguing semantics - marriage vs union. It seems like a fools errand. Just call it marriage and be done with it. If you don't want to perform them at your church, don't.

WGAF if persons unknown to you have a legal agreement between themselves and the state to handle their personal affairs called "marriage"? You are making this more complicated than it needs to be, for Christ's sake.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top