In the last discussion on gay marriage I came out firmly on the side of freedom. Period. I haven't changed that opinion, but I was discussing this with a friend who has a background in Anthropology, Archeology and History, and I thought his observations were worth commenting on.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk
To all, is marriage a right or just an institution created by religion? You know, the religious notion that marriage should be between a man and women. It all gets very complicated:hmm:
|
I think it's a right, but we all know what I think, so I'm going to talk about what my friend thinks. He doesn't believe marriage is a right, nor does he believe marriage is religious in nature.
His observation was that the Greeks, and some other ancient groups, believed that the only true love could happen between members of the same sex, because only they could understand each other. In his opinion, those cultures invented marriage as a social contract between a man and a woman for the purpose of establishing a family unit for the purpose of raising children. Marriage didn't really become a religious function until the middle ages, when the Catholic Church came to the conclusion that control could be exerted over the civil institutions by getting religion into the marriage game.
While in the original thread I argued against the right of a society or community to dictate law according to arbitrary standards, my friend challenged that opinion on the basis that all licenses - from plumbers to drivers to electricians - are awarded by the state according to set standards, and this includes marriage licenses.
I still stand by my original beliefs, but I thought his ideas were worth sharing.
As far as benefits go, in my opinion the purpose of benefits for spouses is to guarantee the safety of families if the breadwinner can no longer supply the bread. But aren't benefits a function of the heads of the company awarding them, and not state interference?
@ Frame57: a lot of your observations are worth considering, but "I'm smarter than you!" is hardly going to get people to consider your opinions. Just the opposite, I'd say. And, do medical problems and whether people are born that way or choose to be that way really have anything to do with rights and liberty. I've heard doctors back up their opinion that motorcycle riders should be forced to wear helmets on the grounds that they've had to treat a lot of head injuries. I didn't swallow that one either.