Monday, May 28, 2012

"Marriage"


“Marriage”
P. Schultz
May 28, 2012

“Take the loaded word "marriage" out of the idea of civil right law for legal domestic partnership; grant legal domestic partnerships; no mention of sexual orientation.

“Marriage License should be changed to Legal Domestic Partnerships; which grants same civil rights; and is completely devoid of any religious or sexual orientation connotations; and Legal Domestic Partnerships could be granted at any Civil Office; Village Hall, Town Hall, City Hall; witnessed by one; signed by two domestic partners; and notarized; and filed in Vital Statistics Records in the State where the Legal Domestic Partnership Contract was signed.

“Is that good enough??? Marriage Licenses should be obsolete; Legal Domestic Partnerships is secular and has no prejudicial language in it. OK?”

From Carol Benedict Russell, from Shelter Island, N.Y. in today’s NY Times. Makes a lot of sense to me. And if people also wanted to be “married,” they would go to their priests, ministers, rabbis, or imams and be “married.” Marriage licenses from the civil authorities would be obsolete and marriage could again be seen as a “covenant” by those who wish to view it that way.

Also, this proposal would also serve to distinguish between those who oppose same sex marriages from those who oppose same sex relationships.

Of course, the “problem” with this proposal is that it makes a lot of sense and will, therefore, be rejected by our politicians.

No comments:

Post a Comment