ThinkingSkull.com

... the official home page of Kevin A. Ranson

MovieCrypt.com

»  Biblical, Moral, or Political?

Separation of church and state is simple: a law should not exist if it is based entirely upon a specific religious practice or doctrine (just look at how much fun living in the Middle East has become). One way to get around the stickiness is to call something moral, which (according to Merriam-Webster) is defined “implies conformity to established sanctioned codes or accepted notions of right and wrong.” Therefore, the enacting of any law based on moral values is to essentially decree what is right and what is wrong.

Murder is wrong. Stealing is wrong. Um… is same-sex marriage wrong?

A measure in the US Senate failed to pass this week, one that that decrees that states who do not sanction same-sex marriages are not required to recognize a union made in the state where it was allowed. The act was in response to a failure to ban gay marriage all together, but what is really the issue here?

The simple answer sounds a lot like ‘money’. A recognized union between any two individuals could theoretically take advantage of tax breaks given to married couples. After all, no one in government can dispute that the act of two consenting adults who willingly share an occupancy is wrong, but think of all the money politicians stand to lose at tax time if anyone can declare that they are a couple financially.

Just to show how behind the times this lawmaking thinking really is, look at the benefits of working for larger companies. For insurance and benefits, defintions have changed from ’spouse’ and become ‘partner.’ Apparently, there’s more of *them* than anyone wants to admit, and they’re making plenty of money as consumers. As for people taking advantage of their government’s generosity by declaring themselves married, it already happens. Many military marriages are simple agreements; GIs get more money for doing the same job if they have a spouse, and the spouse gets free government benefits (this is very old news if you’re not already familiar with it).

Forget the whole sanctity of marriage thing and let whatever higher powers people worship deal with it in the afterlife. If two people are willing to take the plunge, they shouldn’t have to sneak around, scream louder than everyone else to be heard, or drive all over the country to get hitched only to come home and be told it doesn’t really count.

But hey, if you’re rich, you don’t need marriage to get a tax break, right?

No comments yet. Be the first.

Leave a reply

Mexico