Quote:
Quote by: Fangrim  Traditionally, the right to marry has been solely the states' domain. The states decide how they regulate marriage and how protect it.
States' rights, however, are completely broken, in the ineffectual sense. Federal rights are bah-ROken, in the over-dominating sense.
The boundaries of state and federal domains have essentially dissapeared. So yes, marriage rights are a federal issue, just like anything else nowadays... |
No, I think traditionally marriage has been within the domain of religion. Is there a reason that the state should be concerned with it?
Quote:
Quote by: Fangrim Marriage is ingrained in society past the ideas of religion. It is not a religious institution in the sense that the government must not have anything to do with it. Besides, separation of church and state does not supercede majority rule (with minority rights, of course...).
I'm not sure as to the semantics of recognizing versus creating. There's definitely a distinction, but I find it unimportant. |
I agree that the institution of marriage has gone past religion, but if that was the original source, then the government should not be seen as the arbiter of basic marriage rights, as they do not originate with the government.
The distinction is that the government, if it does not create the state of marriage but only recognizes a certain couple as being married, does not grant the right to marry. If that is the case, then the argument goes outside of the realm of rights and constitutional law. That is hardly unimportant.