|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 8:36 pm
In GSA the other day we had a guest speaker. I love this guy, he came last year (and this year brought ALL of the members full sized Snickers bars becasue he 'stood us up' the week before because he got caught in a meeting.) but anyways. Hes a preatur (sp) at a local church and hes just awsome.
Well, we were talking and things and I made my statment:
"Every weding I've ever been to has been 'In the name of the holy spirt' or 'In the house of God' but, since when does God have anything to do with vowing yourself to someone for the rest of your life? None that I know of. It would make a whole lot more since if they had it so you had a 'civel union' for EVERYONE and THEN if you wanted to take it to a religous step you can have a 'marrage'. It just makes more sence. No one ever listens to my suggestion of that."
So, Stephen said: "Thats the way they have it in Europe."
So, my question is: Why not like Europe? It makes sence, it doesn't hurt anyone, AND it would solve alot of problems. What do you think?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2005 12:56 pm
Sounds Promising, what are you proposing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2005 10:07 pm
Tenaku Sounds Promising, what are you proposing? What I'm saying is: I think that when you decide to vow yourself to someone for the rest of your life it should be a cival union. Then if you'd like to take it to a religous level you can be married infront of whatever god or religon you may follow. ~~~ This way no one is taking away from the 'sanity of marrage' and you can be with the person you love without having to take it to a religous level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2005 11:37 am
I dunno. I think that's a good idea, but what about all the couples that got married and didn't see it as a religous thing? I would be kinda pissed if I was like "I"m married." and everyone automatically thought I was really religous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2005 7:31 pm
Claena I dunno. I think that's a good idea, but what about all the couples that got married and didn't see it as a religous thing? I would be kinda pissed if I was like "I"m married." and everyone automatically thought I was really religous. ^^; Yes, that is one problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 6:03 pm
I don't think that kind of distinction should be made. Especially when Christianity originally FORBID marriage as a satanic, paganistic practice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 11:53 pm
BakaTulip I don't think that kind of distinction should be made. Especially when Christianity originally FORBID marriage as a satanic, paganistic practice. You have a point there. Then again, I have NO knowlage of relgion =_=.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2006 6:41 pm
I'm not too sure about that. Because of this...there is also an increase in the divorce rates in Europe...and a decrease of actual marriages. And I also disagree with a marriage being purly religious.....even though with all the legalities in the United States it's almost like a buisness partnership
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 9:07 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:05 am
Well human martial relations have constantly changed, and used to vary quite markedly from civilization hub to civilization hub.
I'm more for a system where marriage is in a sense abolished. That is, people will simply list themselves as "married" to another person, turn in a happy piece of paper to their local county clerk, and all that marriage would get you is social security benefits in the event that your spouse died, with any personal property aquired since the time of the turning in of the marital papers and the swearing in of the person's deposition (to make sure it isn't coerced) split evenly in the event of a separation. Done.
Any religious ceremony afterwords would be, as now, entirely optional. Though this plan would essentially strip religious institutions of the ability to issue marriage certificates (though France already does this - that is, the state must declare you married first, whereas in many places in America you can simply be officially married in a church or religious building (excluding poligamy).
As another note Spain's current government is self proclaimed Socialist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:32 pm
REDGallenger Well human martial relations have constantly changed, and used to vary quite markedly from civilization hub to civilization hub. I'm more for a system where marriage is in a sense abolished. That is, people will simply list themselves as "married" to another person, turn in a happy piece of paper to their local county clerk, and all that marriage would get you is social security benefits in the event that your spouse died, with any personal property aquired since the time of the turning in of the marital papers and the swearing in of the person's deposition (to make sure it isn't coerced) split evenly in the event of a separation. Done. Any religious ceremony afterwords would be, as now, entirely optional. Though this plan would essentially strip religious institutions of the ability to issue marriage certificates (though France already does this - that is, the state must declare you married first, whereas in many places in America you can simply be officially married in a church or religious building (excluding poligamy). As another note Spain's current government is self proclaimed Socialist. That's why I'm moving to France! xd or Japan which ever tickles my pickle when I graduate from university! I think if we really are a secular country then something of that kind should be done to sepperate civil unions and religiuos marriges! I didn't know Spain has a Socialist goverment! So much for NATO! Its horrible how Colombia aside from Peru are the only non-socialist countries in South America!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:21 pm
The religious will never stand for it. "What they cannot change, they abolish." they will say...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2006 9:36 pm
Dude, my parents are married and it's not religious. Most of the time it isn't. No one assumes you are religious if you are married. It's bullshit. Anyways all the laws refer only to marriage because it is a legal state.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 6:01 am
Indeed, you can simply have Der Staat marry you right now, it's just who can't do that right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 11:53 am
If the USA was like Europe in any more ways, the egotistical people of the US (sterotype, I apologize) would say that we are not as independent as we claim to be.
But then, I can go on my independence rant on how we're not independent at all....but that's off-topic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
