Note: Before reading the following arguments, please understand that they are not what I believe. On Wednesdays, I deliberately argue for wrong ideas, challenging my listeners to call and defend the obvious right answer, which is usually far harder than one would expect. This is a summary of what Wacky Andrew will be arguing, not a representation of what real Andrew believes.
Marriage is a private agreement.
This would solve the issues of gay marriage and polygamy
The only basis for government regulation of marriage is religion
Do you want the government “permitting” your marriage?
Why should it be so hard to get a divorce?
What people do in the privacy of their own lives should be their business.
The government has no place in preferring one sort of sexual (or non-sexual) relationship over any other.
They shouldn’t be charging money to certify marriages
You don’t need government to be married or divorced.
It’s just a piece of paper, anyhow.
The government doesn’t do enough to actually regulate it, so why be involved at all?
It would simplify the tax code considerably.
We need to save marriage from the politicians.
It is ridiculous for a 21st century government to endorse married people's sexuality but tell unmarried people their sexuality is wrong.
Don’t you believe in freedom and free markets?
Can’t you still have marriage without the government in it?
When was the last time you thought it was a good idea to grant government authority over such a private, religious, moral, and sexual decision?
The government, granted authority over marriage, is heavily intrusive through divorce law on an area that should be governed by the church first.
Marriage is an important institution. The modern mistake is to think that important things must be planned, sponsored, reviewed, or licensed by the government.
Even the church didn’t really get involved in the marriage business until 12th Century, and then 16th century for the law.
Government doesn’t validate your baptism or a barmitzvah, why this?
If you believe in limited government, what a great and immediate step to shrink the size and intrusiveness of government.
You write your own vows much of the time anyway? Why shouldn’t you be able to customize your marriage to fit your desires and intents?
Marriage is a private agreement.
This would solve the issues of gay marriage and polygamy
The only basis for government regulation of marriage is religion
Do you want the government “permitting” your marriage?
Why should it be so hard to get a divorce?
What people do in the privacy of their own lives should be their business.
The government has no place in preferring one sort of sexual (or non-sexual) relationship over any other.
They shouldn’t be charging money to certify marriages
You don’t need government to be married or divorced.
It’s just a piece of paper, anyhow.
The government doesn’t do enough to actually regulate it, so why be involved at all?
It would simplify the tax code considerably.
We need to save marriage from the politicians.
It is ridiculous for a 21st century government to endorse married people's sexuality but tell unmarried people their sexuality is wrong.
Don’t you believe in freedom and free markets?
Can’t you still have marriage without the government in it?
When was the last time you thought it was a good idea to grant government authority over such a private, religious, moral, and sexual decision?
The government, granted authority over marriage, is heavily intrusive through divorce law on an area that should be governed by the church first.
Marriage is an important institution. The modern mistake is to think that important things must be planned, sponsored, reviewed, or licensed by the government.
Even the church didn’t really get involved in the marriage business until 12th Century, and then 16th century for the law.
Government doesn’t validate your baptism or a barmitzvah, why this?
If you believe in limited government, what a great and immediate step to shrink the size and intrusiveness of government.
You write your own vows much of the time anyway? Why shouldn’t you be able to customize your marriage to fit your desires and intents?
Links:
Let’s really get government out of our bedrooms (Michael Kinsley)
Taking marriage private (NYT)
Don’t let the government define marriage (Mises Institute)
Privatize marriage (Slate)
Should the government legislate relationships? (About)
Government and marriage (Rep. Ron Paul)
Can government strengthen marriage? (pdf) (MarriageDebate.com)
Government mandated marriage promotion (Unmarried.org)
Government marriage (William Stone)
Outing government from marriage (Reason)
A gay-marriage solution: end marriage? (Time)
1 comment:
Mr. Tallman, thank you so much for bringing this question up for "Wacky Wednesday." It was my first time listening to your show, and I have been thinking about this specific question you brought up for the past few weeks: why should the government even be involved in marriage at all if you claim to be a conservative and that the government is too big and that it is bad?
I've been reading the book, "Marriage on Trial" by Glenn T. Stanton and Dr. Bill Maier, and they do not address this question, which deeply bothered me because as a college-aged conservative, I see many of my fellow peers leaning towards supporting gay marriage or government getting out of the marriage business, as Ron Paul and others support. They do address some of the reasons supporting marriage= one man + one woman, but seem to avoid this question you asked on your program. I believe that what the next generation of conservative Christians believe will define where this marriage debate goes. Right now, it seems as though most are leaning towards the government not being involved in marriage.
Marriage is the ideal of society and should be the mainframe of our society. And you're right. Sexuality isn't a private matter. It's a family matter and therefore a societal matter. I don't think that our culture understands the metaphysical aspect of philosophy.
Post a Comment