Get Government Out of Marriage

I’ve done entries on this topic before but today I read a really good discussion on the history of Valentine’s day and why the government doesn’t belong in the marriage business. Read the whole thing. Here’s a clip:

As we approach the anniversary of Valentine’s own rebellion and denial, shouldn’t the nation that pioneered a popular government of the people, by the people, and for the people” be the one that finally stands to assert the pre-governmental primacy of matrimonial privacy?

It is time to privatize marriage. If the institution is really so sacred, it should lie beyond the withering hands of politicians and policy makers in Washington D.C. There should be no federal or state license that grants validity to love. There should be no state-run
office that peers into our bedrooms and honeymoon suites. If the church thinks divorce and homosexuality are problematic, it should initiate the real dialogue to address these problems in-house rather than relying on state-sponsored coercion to affirm doctrinal beliefs. And if tax-codes and guardianships need some classification for couples, let’s revise civil union standards to reflect those needs.

In his second inaugural address, President Bush highlighted the preeminent importance of liberty and individual responsibility noting, “In America’s ideal of freedom, the public interest depends on private character—on integrity, and tolerance toward others, and the rule of conscience in our own lives. Self-government relies, in the end, on
the governing of the self.”

This Valentine’s Day, let’s live up to this call and spark a revolution in commemoration of the occasion—the very revolution alluded to in Bush’s latest, and most eloquent speech. On February 14th, take a loved one to dinner. Reach out to those who are lonely. But if you really want to honor the martyr, join in the battle to take matters of personal character—matters that should precede governmental authority—out of the hands of the state.

Amen. Our marriages don’t need government sanction and our churches shouldn’t be threatened with the possibility of being forced to recognize a definition of marriage that is abhorrent to them because the government or our courts make a decree.

1 Comment

1. Well by that logic, gay marriage could be permitted within churches that feel that it is sanctioned by god. I semi agree with you, while I don’t think taht government can define marriage, I think gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry. As well, if there is a true seperation of church and state, and all religions are entitled to their own practices, then marriage cannot be made into a strictly christian practice since it does exist in other religions. I don’t know, just my thoughts on your thoughts . . .

   Comment by Napoleon — April 6, 2005 @ 12:35 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.