Emerson College’s only independent, student-run newspaper since 1947

The Berkeley Beacon

Emerson College’s only independent, student-run newspaper since 1947

The Berkeley Beacon

Emerson College’s only independent, student-run newspaper since 1947

The Berkeley Beacon

Marriage and government need a divorce


As the United States Supreme Court hears arguments on the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8, its steps have swarmed with advocates and opponents of gay marriage. Amid a sea of rainbow flags and scripture-scribbled placards, supporters of marriage equality and Bible-thumping traditionalists are battling over the defining social issue of our time: how our government will define marriage. However, both sides are asking the wrong question. The real problem is why our government is defining marriage, heterosexual or homosexual, to begin with.

To put it shortly: The government shouldn’t be recognizing the marriage of any couple. The institution of marriage, and its definition, is a deeply personal issue. The statue should have no authority determining this intimate relationship. Let’s get the government out of marriage, and limit its reach to what is appropriate: enforcing civil unions.

In the context of the gay marriage debate, “civil unions” most often denotes granting a same-sex couple the legal benefits of marriage while denying to recognize their union as such. But both same-sex and heterosexual couples should not need our secular government to recognize their union as marriage. They should each receive civil unions with identical privileges and obligations from the government, and define their union in a way that is appropriate and personal to them.

Inappropriate recognitions of marriage by a state separated from church is precisely what dragged us into our present social quagmire. Religious traditionalists impose their morality on consenting adults trying to enter legal unions that do not affect them. Conversely, secular advocates for same-sex marriage find themselves arguing with the morality and message of a religious tradition they do not observe.

A government recognition of marriage fails to separate marriage as a religious conception and marriage as an interpersonal contract acknowledged by the state. As the religious traditionalists argue, our societal concept of marriage originated from Judeo-Christian tradition. The biblical definition of marriage gives us Adam and Eve, but it doesn’t include tax exemptions for health insurance contributions or tax credits for children. If traditionalists want our government to only recognize the biblical definition of marriage, they should also renounce its modern, civil privileges.

Legally recognized marriages come stuffed with these privileges. According to the Human Rights Campaign, there are 1,318 federal benefits, rights, and and protections granted by marital

status. That’s not even counting state benefits. It also comes with power of attorney, co-ownership, the ability to make wills, and obligations like alimony.

The government must trim those civil privileges from marriage, and recognize them exclusively as benefits of civil unions. Under this model, the civil privileges and government recognition is available to all citizens entering a civil union, regardless of sex or religious affiliation. It is up to the individuals entering the civil union to determine whether it will be sanctified

as a marriage by their church or temple in a religious ceremony, or in the eyes of their own union or friends and family, or not use the “m-word” at all. It’s not a government issue what beliefs a church or individuals hold about marriage, just that its legal benefits and obligations are protected and enforced.

Because the government does not decree what a civil union must be considered, no religious person would be forced to recognize one as a religious union, and secular individuals would not have the definition of a religious union imposed on their own. Equal civil privileges would belong to all without mandating what definition of marriage anyone else must accept.

In an ideal world, the government would recognize the inappropriate breach in personal and religious beliefs caused by regulating marriage. But until the government can separate the privileges of civil unions from the personal concept of marriage, equal marriage rights should apply to all.

Leave a Comment
Donate to The Berkeley Beacon

Your donation will support the student journalists of Emerson College. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.

Donate to The Berkeley Beacon

Comments (0)

The Berkeley Beacon intends for this area to be used to foster healthy, thought-provoking discussion. We welcome strong opinions and criticism that are respectful and constructive. All users are expected to adhere to our comment section policy laid out below: (A) THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PERMITTED: 1- Name-calling, personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity, impersonations, SHOUTING and incoherence. 2- Personal attacks against our staff. 3- language that might be interpreted as libelous (defamatory). 4- Any form of personal and/or commercial promotion. (B) HOW WE MODERATE COMMENTS: Most comments will be posted if they are on-topic, article related and not abusive. Comment moderation decisions are subjective and completely at the discretion of the current website editor and Berkeley Beacon Staff. (C) USER VERIFICATION: All comments on our site must be approved by Berkeley Beacon staff to ensure that they meet the Comment Section Policies. The Berkeley Beacon also requires a valid email address from anyone who wishes to comment. Once you have submitted your comment for review you will immediately receive an automated email to confirm your email address (Comments will NOT be approved if you have not confirmed your email address). Your email address will not be displayed or available to the public and will only be used to confirm your comments. Comments will typically be reviewed within 24-48 hours.
All Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *