Originally Posted by Zissou'sMom
..., then why on earth should the law reflect your beliefs and not theirs? ...
I didn't say that. My goodness, you sure have a talent for putting words into people's mouths.
The law should be neutral; it shouldn't reflect beliefs. The law is to regulate behavior
, the law isn't to regulate belief
. I can believe anything I want, but if my behavior results in me stealing from someone, then the law steps in.
However, this nation was founded by, and was led by, and still is comprised of primarily, citizens of a Judeo-Christian background/religion/heritage/ethnic group. So naturally the legislation that they write and put into the law of the land is going to reflect their beliefs/morals/mores/traditions. And up until this point, that has been that marriage is between one man and one woman.
In order to make the law neutral, and in order to make the law equal, I propose separating marriage from the jurisdiction of the state. The state would have jurisdiction over legal unions between two adults, providing them with all the same rights and benefits formerly accrued under the marriage license. Marriage, since it derives from a Judeo-Christian belief system, and is a union between a man and a woman, would be under the jurisdiction of whatever religion the husband and wife choose to get married under. Marriage would simply be a sacred covenant between these two people, and between them and their God; it wouldn't have any legal ramifications. This arrangement would get religion out of the state and the state out of religion, would provide equality under the law for everyone, and should be a satisfactory solution to all.
So you see, what you say I said is really the complete opposite. I really don't like it when people put a meaning I never meant, which is so easily done by just putting the words in a post, and then some people might believe it.