RE: marriage (was: Another query to George and comments to Janice)

"Hasnt this already happened? Is there any argument against same sex
marriage that is not a religious argument? How can the state enforce a
religious view on someone that does not hold that view?"

TTV: I don't know if there are any non-religious arguments against same-sex
marriage, but I would think that there may well some impact of the children
that have two mommies or two daddies. The problem is that one would have to
perform an experiment to determine this. Maybe The Netherlands is running
such an experiment and, in that case, we might want to see what the
long-term effects are after, say, two generations.

Strictly speaking, a state should not be able to enforce a religious view on
someone that does not hold that view and that's why used the term
Judeo-Christian tradition. However, most western societies are based on
this tradition and our laws reflect that. Judeo-Christian tradition, for
example, does not accept polygamy (yes, I know that Abraham, Jacob, Solomon
were in polygamous relationships) but, traditionally (last 1000+ years) this
has not been an accepted practice. Polygamy, as instituted by the Mormons,
was at odds with the Judeo-Christian tradition as expressed in the laws of
the US at the time and the state, at that time, enforced its view on the
Mormons. Most Mormons changed their theology accordingly. If a society
severs its ties with that tradition, all bets are off, and there is no
longer any case to be made against polygamy, whether it is advocated by FLDS
or Muslims. If you follow the current fuss about the FLDS these days, you
get an idea where this can lead.

As an aside, somebody asked if same sex marriage would affect me adversely.
The answer is, no, not yet, but I know of people who had to turn in their
licence to perform civil marriages because they would not perform same-sex
marriages in my Manitoba. There has also been a case where a Catholic
organization (Knights of Columbus) was sued because they would not rent
their hall out to a same-sex union affair. They had initially agreed to
rent their facilities, not knowing that the reception would be for a
same-sex couple. I wonder how long it will be before churches that will not
conduct same-sex marriages will lose their tax exempt status. I am aware of
one congregation [in Ontario] that will only marry couples if at least one
of the couple is a member in good standing of that congregation, just to
avoid any possibility of a law suit if they refuse to marry a same-sex
couple.

Chuck Vandergraaf

-----Original Message-----
From: drsyme@cablespeed.com [mailto:drsyme@cablespeed.com]
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 10:43 AM
To: Tjalle T Vandergraaf; 'Jim Armstrong'; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: marriage (was: Another query to George and comments to Janice)

On Fri, 9 Jun 2006 09:06:18 -0500
  "Tjalle T Vandergraaf" <ttveiv@mts.net> wrote:
>> IHMO, once the state severs its relationship with
>traditional
> Judeo-Christian values, all best are off and the any
>future decisions will
> be based on the will of the majority and that will lead
>us into uncharted
> waters. >
> Chuck Vandergraaf

Hasnt this already happened? Is there any argument
against same sex marriage that is not a religious
argument? How can the state enforce a religious view on
someone that does not hold that view?

If we still held Judeo-Christian values as a society,
abortion wouldnt be the issue that it is. And there are
more non-religious arguements against abortion than there
are against same sex unions it seems to me.

This is why I think there is a distinction between
marriage in a civil sense, and in a religious sense.

Jack
Received on Fri Jun 9 15:25:38 2006