LGBTQ+ Rights and Religion

Medinoc,

You do realize it is only because of government involvement we have the concept of informed consent?

Without legislation saying that's not allowed, people would try and force mentally unstable or underaged weddings. How do I know this? Because it still happens. It happens overseas, it was a problem in America before we passed those laws.

I do not want marriage to be outside the government's domain.

edited 25th Apr '13 12:17:13 PM by Gabrael

Then I think you forgot a "don't" in the point where you first brought it up. It looks like you're saying the opposite.

Emotionally it's incredibly rough to go through, and pragmatically the strain from a sudden change in financial and living situation is downright hazardous — especially in an economic downturn where you're lucky to have any stability and support in the first place. God forbid you have kids, who are measurably more likely to get fucked up in all kinds of ways.

So yes, barring extreme circumstances, I'd be quite willing to say divorce is indeed a terrible thing, even before you start throwing in religious views that make it even worse. For this reason, if no other, religious sects need to at the very least pay damn close attention to how married gays function, because they're observably a hell of lot better at it than the rest of us.

edited 25th Apr '13 1:26:10 PM by Pykrete

I think it'd be more helpful to stop treating never getting married like a horrible thing. Maybe people would be less likely to rush in to marriages that way.

Also, though individual divorces may be justifiable, the current institution of divorce is a terrible thing because it makes it easier to get married to somebody you're not quite sure about.

I don't think couples should have to justify their divorce to the court.

Because it makes it easier to end marriages?

Indeed.

With that I agree.

Marriages that are easy to end are worse than ones that are impossible to?

No, of course not. But I think that marriages that are difficult to end would be a happy medium.

Divorce as of now isn't exactly easy. As has been stated before, it's pretty financially messy.

That's only if there's a disagreement between the divorcees.

Kinda sounds like you guys think that marriage should just be done away with as a legal concept.

I kinda think the institution is fine, I think the cultural thinking that it is required to live a happy life is stupid and damaging but I have nothing against two people who are happy with each other getting married.

edited 25th Apr '13 2:23:36 PM by Wildcard

I think marriage should be made harder to do. Not divorce. If you had to jump a few hurdles (like counselling) going into it, you'd get fewer stupid ones happening.

As the gay community has shown: a little hurdle-jumping actually can have positive effects on the institution itself. However: only if done right. Obstructionism for the worst reasons doesn't wash.

Totally agreed, actually.

People should give a hell of a lot more consideration to whether they should marry. And have kids, too, but marriage is rarely a byproduct of a single wild night if you don't live in Las Vegas.

I think increasing divorce restrictions would lead to more people to staying in an abusive marriage for the sake of not going through divorce, and could also create dependence issues because one spouse doesn't make enough money to cover divorce.

Maybe we should start a divorce topic. Cause this could be interesting to talk about in more depth.

edited 25th Apr '13 2:33:19 PM by Wildcard

Go for it. But I'd say raise the bar for starting marriages, not ending them.

I'm personally in favor of the abolishment of marriage as a legal concept and it solely becoming a social construct, but neither side really wants that.

This way Christians can say we can't get married all they want, and that it's wrong or not a real marriage or whatever, they can't stop us anymore then we can stop them.

edited 25th Apr '13 9:55:07 PM by LMage

@Gabrael: And people here in the US still sometimes have marriages with underage people.

However, while that's a mark against it, the bigger point is that, even without marriage being a legal concept, relationships, whether they're called marriages or not, with people underage would still fall under age of consent laws and would still be illegal. Marriage as a legal concept is not necessary for that sort of regulation.

DP,

The only way you get an underage marriage is with parental consent before a judge and their is still an age of consent before that can happen. Is it perfect? No. But there is still a check and balance as much as possible without infringing on the rights of the whole.

And if you take marriage out of the legal sphere, how can you enforce age of consent?

If marriage isn't a legal matter then laws saying who can or cannot get married become null and void. Its like saying owning animals is out of the legal sphere but wanting to restrict exotic pets. You can't have your cake and eat it to.

If the government has a right to restrict or regulate something it is in their sphere and it is that way for the protection of the whole.

We restrict who can adopt, where you can bury your dead, how you grow food, etc not because government needs to be in everything but because we have to consider the short and long term health of the society in general.

Like I said, if marriage and divorce are completely void of government control, there are tons of problems that can and most likely will happen for both heterosexual and homosexual couples and their children. That's putting a lot of faith in human nature I am not willing to do.

Will most people be good about it? Maybe. A fair portion probably would continue as normal. But those who would abuse it or who would make problems with it will be given a massive leeway if the government didn't have legal authority over marriage. The bad that can cause is not worth any potential good to me.

Instead I feel we should open marriage to any consenting and capable adult. I am all for considering mandatory counselling, waiting periods, or some form of community service prior to someone being allowed to marry. I would love to see more expansive sex end in schools that also includes relationship and communication techniques. I would like to see more discussions on red flags and healthy patterns and behaviors.

I don't mind divorce having a waiting period with exceptions for abuse of course. We have exit counseling for student loans. We should have exit counseling for divorce. Even in amicable divorces people can still use some support and guidance.

And I am all for legal regulations to ensure these reforms.

So like Pykrete suggested, you accidentally a "don't" in this sentence?

I'll pin my incomprehension on my incomplete grasp of the English language.

edited 26th Apr '13 1:03:10 AM by Medinoc

So I'll fix it. Using a smart phone to post on the forums makes proofing long posts difficult.

You guys know me and are smart enough to get what I was trying to say.

@Gabrael: The same way that the government enforces it whenever people have sex with underage people without marrying them. This is something that the government deals with ''regardless of whether or not marriage is a legal construct. I mean, just because there is marriage as a legal construct doesn't mean that non-marriage relationships don't exist.

Also, your analogy with pets is faulty because there's already a form that isn't in the legal sphere, but the "exotic pets" are still regulated with those relationships perfectly well. Since there is already a form that's outside of the legal sphere, anyone who is doing a form that wouldn't be allowed by the government and we would want to stop (such as with relationships with underage people) are going to happen as non-official marriages (ones that are performed, probably in secret, but never registered with the government, which I believe is legal, as long as every other part is legal, since registering with the government only confers the governmental benefits of marriage) or not done as marriages at all. If we took marriage completely out of the legal sphere, those relationships would not change at all and the government would have to deal with them in the same way they deal with them now. I mean, no one is stupid enough to try and register a marriage with someone who is too young for one to legally marry the person (I hope).