Quote:
Originally Posted by ben voyonsdonc
I don't think I'd enjoy heterosexuality. 
Marriage is both a religious and a civil institution. It may have once been only a religious institution but as soon as government became involved it added a different dimension to the institution. Here is the thing: religion has the right to discriminate...government does not. It's ruling doctrine is the Constitution/Charter which enshrines equality rights. It also should not legislate "separate but equal" types of institutions like civil unions because the very fact that it is separate makes it inherently unequal. |
Marriage was a civil institution in most parts of the world that was co-opted by religion to become a religious institution. Ancient Greece and Rome had marriage long before any Christian thought the concept was fundamental to their religion. Jews had marriage in ancient times as well, but if we go from that traditional definition of marriage women would be the property of the husband, men could have multiple wives and concubines and a man could divorce his wife if she was unclean.
I am assuming for most people who care about "traditional" marriage, they mean the Christian version of marriage, that is the version that is the bedrock of modern society. I am assuming they do not include anti-miscegenation laws, so they must mean traditional marriage post 1967 (at least in the American concept). So basically the traditional marriage that I am assuming enlightened individuals like BlackRedGold25 are fighting for is that sweet spot of matrimonial bliss in the spring of 1968, before the hippes started screwing up marriage.