... A contract made in due form of law, by which a free man and a free woman reciprocally engage to live with each other during their joint lives, in the union which ought io[sp] exist between husband and wife. -source
[collapse=First an anecdote:]
Arriving at the grocery store we see a Honda element with California plates parked out front. The bumper sticker reads: "Marriage is between one man and one woman." The font is almost paisley, curling and flourishing with strong whites and blues to catch your eye but at the same time a bit difficult to read (especially if one is riding tailgate).
"Bigot mother ****er," my formerly lesbian wife proclaims.
"Free speech," I comment as we go inside.
"Yeah, he can have my free foot up his ***."
"Why you gotta be so violent," I tease.
We finish our shopping, and she's left her wallet in the car, so to be safe she goes to wait in the car while I pay. I leave a few moments after her, to find that she's not alone. The owner of the car, which we'd parked right next to for some reason, is there, having a heated argument with my wife.
"What is your problem," he asks.
"You. You are my problem. People like you, who are so filled with hate and intolerance that you can't see the damage you're doing. Are you even married?"
"No. And it's you who's filled with hate. You who need to think about what you're saying. About the Constitution..."
"You have no right to cite the constitution! -Especially- considering you're driving an import."
This is a terribly bland version of what was said, of course, because I don't feel like having a bunch of ****'s all over the place. But you can imagine she was swearing literally every other word, which is what we call "gettin' cussed out." He decided he'd had enough. He got into his Honda, rolled the window, and proceeded to drive off.
"SUCK A BIG FAT ****," my wife screamed through his window, her face all up in it. He hit his accelerator to speed away, and she punched his window and flipped him off.
He slammed on his brakes. He got out of the car, a knife in his hands.
"What is your problem???" He was at a loss, but clearly angry at her hitting his car window.
My wife walked right up next to him, the point of the blade tempting her torso.
"Do it," she dared.
"I'm calling the police," he said, lamely.
"Go ahead! You're in Mississippi, mother ****er, this is MY town, you California POS, call you the cops, you'll get what's coming to you."
He got back in his Honda, and left.
I'm used to this type of manic behavior from her, lol. It's part of what I accepted when we married. But it does raise an important question for me. As has been said recently here in the Hall, one does not have the right to not be offended. The constitution does not protect that. Though she found his bumper sticker aggravating, and offensive, she technically (at least in the eyes of the law) was in the wrong, he in the right. She was verbally abusive, and even guilty of assault, which is why he felt the need to arm himself for protection.
[/collapse]
The issue:
Marriage itself is a purely religious doctrine, and as such, churches have every right to define marriage however they want, be it only between a man and a woman, or what have you. The union of marriage by the state, as in a marriage license, which then changes your tax status, etc. the "benefits" of being married, this should fall under civil union, and be granted to any 2 people living together, regardless of their gender. By the law's definition of marriage above, we see a conflict of interest, in that the state has defined marriage for its own purposes despite the origins of it. This seems to breech the separation of church and state doctrine, which while not explicitly mentioned in the constitution, is still one of our founding principles.
[collapse=First an anecdote:]
Arriving at the grocery store we see a Honda element with California plates parked out front. The bumper sticker reads: "Marriage is between one man and one woman." The font is almost paisley, curling and flourishing with strong whites and blues to catch your eye but at the same time a bit difficult to read (especially if one is riding tailgate).
"Bigot mother ****er," my formerly lesbian wife proclaims.
"Free speech," I comment as we go inside.
"Yeah, he can have my free foot up his ***."
"Why you gotta be so violent," I tease.
We finish our shopping, and she's left her wallet in the car, so to be safe she goes to wait in the car while I pay. I leave a few moments after her, to find that she's not alone. The owner of the car, which we'd parked right next to for some reason, is there, having a heated argument with my wife.
"What is your problem," he asks.
"You. You are my problem. People like you, who are so filled with hate and intolerance that you can't see the damage you're doing. Are you even married?"
"No. And it's you who's filled with hate. You who need to think about what you're saying. About the Constitution..."
"You have no right to cite the constitution! -Especially- considering you're driving an import."
This is a terribly bland version of what was said, of course, because I don't feel like having a bunch of ****'s all over the place. But you can imagine she was swearing literally every other word, which is what we call "gettin' cussed out." He decided he'd had enough. He got into his Honda, rolled the window, and proceeded to drive off.
"SUCK A BIG FAT ****," my wife screamed through his window, her face all up in it. He hit his accelerator to speed away, and she punched his window and flipped him off.
He slammed on his brakes. He got out of the car, a knife in his hands.
"What is your problem???" He was at a loss, but clearly angry at her hitting his car window.
My wife walked right up next to him, the point of the blade tempting her torso.
"Do it," she dared.
"I'm calling the police," he said, lamely.
"Go ahead! You're in Mississippi, mother ****er, this is MY town, you California POS, call you the cops, you'll get what's coming to you."
He got back in his Honda, and left.
I'm used to this type of manic behavior from her, lol. It's part of what I accepted when we married. But it does raise an important question for me. As has been said recently here in the Hall, one does not have the right to not be offended. The constitution does not protect that. Though she found his bumper sticker aggravating, and offensive, she technically (at least in the eyes of the law) was in the wrong, he in the right. She was verbally abusive, and even guilty of assault, which is why he felt the need to arm himself for protection.
[/collapse]
The issue:
Marriage itself is a purely religious doctrine, and as such, churches have every right to define marriage however they want, be it only between a man and a woman, or what have you. The union of marriage by the state, as in a marriage license, which then changes your tax status, etc. the "benefits" of being married, this should fall under civil union, and be granted to any 2 people living together, regardless of their gender. By the law's definition of marriage above, we see a conflict of interest, in that the state has defined marriage for its own purposes despite the origins of it. This seems to breech the separation of church and state doctrine, which while not explicitly mentioned in the constitution, is still one of our founding principles.
