Marriage: More Compromise, Less Government
The government’s involvement in marriage exemplifies the amount of restricted rights of the American people today. Marriage, a sacred union between a man and woman, should have no government restrictions over it.
Marriage has been a religious and holy union between a male and female for basically ever. The government has no right to infringe upon their wants and desires. It inherently irritates that one must go pick up a marriage license before being wed. This is not a driver’s license or pilot license; no one is in danger of being killed if one doesn’t know the laws of matrimony, though many a fight may follow.
The marriage license doesn’t even require testing if one is ready for marriage the way one would be tested before acquiring a driver’s license or pilot’s license. Pastor’s do a better job at that with pre-marital counseling, actually teaching a couple what marriage entails and the trials and tribulations they will face as a couple.
Marriage laws vary by state but in all 50 states one must obtain a marriage license before being legally wed. The license can cost on average between $20- $80 with the exception of $4 in Massachusetts. In some states there are 1-3 day waiting periods a couple must wait to marry after paying for said license and indeed in some states such as Alabama and Washington D.C. a blood test is required.
I was unaware the government had to okay my marriage. Let alone that I had to pay them to allow it, and God forbid I don’t pass that blood test.
While there are positives to the government being involved in marriage, such as tax deductions the fact of the matter is that the government being as inefficient as it is can delay the union of a couple and makes them pay for something that they shouldn’t have to.
Driver’s licenses’ and pilot’s licenses’, those make sense. The license provides proof that a citizen passed a test assuring that they were safe at driving or flying a plane. A marriage license requires no test. There are no safety rules one must learn. There is no need for the documents, they exist purely for profit for an already bloated government; one that proves time and time again to be irresponsible with the federal budget.
It remains that marriage is a private matter between two people and the government should stay out of it. The government would still be made aware of the marriage by a wedding certificate from the minister. In that sense tax deductions could still be administered to married couples if the government chose to do so.
If the government were out of marriage it would leave the institution up to religious leaders; pastors could marry Christians, rabbis would marry Jews and judges could give civil unions to atheists and anyone else who would rather have that.
Marriage for those of a religious faith will always mean something different than for others. Not to say that a marriage for those of no faith is not one of love, but to say that marriage for Christians and others of strong faiths view marriage as a gift from God and one that will serve Him with greater purpose. For those without religious views the marriage is formed just between the two parties rather than between three.
While I believe that the history of marriage began with God that argument becomes invalid to those who do not believe in Him. Therefore since for those of faith view marriage as a bond between three parties and not two, perhaps it is those of faith that should change the title of their definition of marriage. One that means the joining of the couple and God and in that way everyone would get what they want. No one would be left out of the title of marriage because that definition could be “a union between whomever” versus the church creating their own title and definition, because perhaps the term marriage and its definition doesn’t truly depict what it truly entails for those of faith.
If marriage becomes a separate issue from the government than that would make such compromise possible. Different religious or irreligious groups can do as they will and have its own laws with its own people and the institution would probably run a lot more efficiently, something the federal government knows little about.