Reply #38: The more I think about it, the better it is for both sides. [View All]

[Tigress DEM]

A lot of this whole democracy thing is about being able to live together with people whose beliefs are different in one way or another than our own.

Separation of church and state protects both sides really.

Right now we have muddled definitions that mix and match to make everybody mad.
Civil Marriage. Civil Union. Marriage Sacrament.

If we get down to the nuts and bolts of what needs to be done we can clarify what is the government's part and what is the church's part so that each can handle those pieces which are appropriate.

1) The rights of 2 adults to enter into partnership agreements that affect their family status and legal rights regarding property and asset division. Clearly bureaucratic paperwork.

2) The rights of people to define their union as marriage in the eyes of God. Clearly the church's portion.

What I am proposing is taking "contract" and "marriage" and clearly separating the two. A civil marriage doesn't really confer "God's blessing" anyway, it's a legal document and anyone who wants their marriage blessed has to have a church service now anyway.

This whole issue has been an un-winnable battle because there are people who want to make the civil marriage validate gay rights and people who want civil marriage to be all about man marry woman rights. Both sides are in a tug of war that will never end.

As a Christian, I can point to Solomon's wisdom in offering to divide the baby in two when two women claimed the live child not the one who died in the night was theirs. The actual mother gave up her rights immediately to save the child.

Those people on both sides who actually care about rights on the one hand and marriage on the other will have to step one level beyond Solomon's wisdom and see that the only way to save either is to allow both to live separate lives.

Civil marriage is like Siamese twins attached at the hip which will only die if we continue to pull it apart without any clear definition of what we are doing.

We are already in a bitter fight much in the way South Africa was during Apartheid. Whichever group gains control pushes their agenda. Gays get marriage in June get clobbered in November. Never ending cycle because civil marriage isn't a solution it's the problem.

The government doesn't have any business marrying people because it's not the church. The church doesn't have any business legislating people's rights because it's not the government.

I think of this less as a battle than a truce.

There are many Christians who believe "judge not lest ye be judged" and "let he who is among you that has not sinned cast the first stone." We don't WANT anyone to be denied their rights to be at the bedside of a loved one. We don't presume it is our right to decide who loves whom.

Democratic Christians can see that partnership rights are the purview of the government and need to be strengthened. As a way of support, once we get the legislation passed that makes Civil Unions the de-facto contract of partnerships, I think those of us with existing Civil Marriage licenses who support gay marriage should go in and surrender them in exchange for Civil Union Contracts and have our unions re-blessed to show that we are not afraid.

The bigger fight may be getting people to see the bigger picture so they can let up on their death grip of civil marriage as the only solution.