Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (132585)	3/21/2001 8:46:29 AM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 769667

If states insist on turning civil marriage into a twisted parody of what it's meant to be, maybe it's time for Christians, (Jews? Moslems?) to turn our backs on it. Marriage has become like a package tour--a set of religious, contractual, social, and tax benefits that have evolved over time. Sometimes the package deal, designed to cover as many as possible, doesn't work for anyone. I think it's time to acknowledge that it has become a parody, rethink what we mean by civil marriage, and consider severing the covenant from the rest of the package or making the package a la carte. Karen

To: DMaA who wrote (132585)	3/21/2001 1:46:38 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Indeed. There is hardly any point at all to civil marriage. I say for the forum that I don’t think you will agree with what I am about to say, and that is fine. I merely tell you this because it explains how I see marriage. When non-believers marry, they simply play a little game, one that is quite disposable. When the game loses its fun, they (many of whom call themselves Christians), simply take their ball home in a huff. Knowing this I try and avoid religious arguments in this forum. Indeed, in virtually none of my arguments do I appeal to Christ’s authority because I see many readers here (most?) simply cannot see this higher principle. Why, they can’t even see the earthly principles that condemn them. I nevertheless tend to argue the earthly principle in vain hope that some might see it. But the higher principle of Christ is always behind my thrust. I think you are essentially correct that civil marriages are worthless. But the state does have some interest in supporting a marriage contract. Lets face it, all humans are direct and fundamental products of exactly two other humans, always one male the other female. This link serves to naturally bind society. When you see a human, you see an implied contract between two other humans. SOciety has an interest in recognizing this contract. It certainly aids in mental health for a child to grow up constantly seeing the joint image (created by the presence of mom and dad) whereby his own image came into being. Too many children today long to see (just to see!) their fathers. Too many men, even men in their forties, have anguish because they grew up without their dads. So society has an interest in seeing that families remain intact. Civil marriage can help here. It is really a contract between two people who have capacity to reflect human biological identity. It is also a recognition of the responsibilities implied by procreation. It ought to be at least as enforceable as any other contract. But we have little respect for it today. Ultimately, our lack of respect for marriage is indicative of our lack of respect for ourselves. That is why we flirt with the idea of extending it to homosexuals.