| |  
Food for the Poor Godspy.com: Faith at the Edge



leftymn | 0 posts | Member since 12.18.08


RE: Why Prop 8 Won: TV Commercials Based on Reason, not Fear
"The issue is about preserving society’s right to say that there is a transcendent purpose to marriage, based on the objective reality that through the complementary sexual union of human persons created male and female, life and families are created." The problem with this argument is that nowhere is this to be found in the Constitution, it is strictly a principle ascribed to from a subjective religious belief. Marriage as we know it from a governmental standpoint is really about the enforcement of property rights. The government sanctions a contract between two parties and their relationship and its "production" , be it assets or offspring, are then under the purview of the laws of the state and federal government. The state may have an interest in marriage partners being fruitful and multiplying, (and tax law in a sense does do that, which in my opinion is not fair to childless couples ) but it really is not , nor should not be interested in the "sexual union" of the couple involved. The state has ruled that marriage between siblings or close relatives is forbidden because it results in biological and physical harm to any future offspring as an established fact. The state has also said that polygamy and bigamy are not allowed, not because of sexual or "moral" reasons, but rather because it complicates the issue of the property rights and parental rights. However removed of any religious belief to the contrary, objectively there is simply no real reason to bar a monogamous marriage between two parties of the same sex. They would be subject to the exact same laws as parties of opposite sexes. The Catholic Church and the LDS certainly have a right to believe in marriage solely between a man and a woman. But your argument as expressed in the quote above is hardly "objective", it is subjective in the extreme.

Faith at the Edge Traces