Church vs Marriage vs State??

 The term marriage has changed and holds several definitions regarding what it is, what role it plays in the church and in society, and as to whom are allotted the privilege to participate in these ceremonies.  The definition of a marriage is a sacred vow between a man and woman. The bible implies the words “he” and “she,” in reference to a man and a woman marital status; this does not apply to those of the same sex. The word sacred means a connection with God or a dedication to a religious purpose; therefore, the statement “marriage is a sacred institution” which preceded from President Bush mouth was wrong in reference to him being the former leader of the United States which consists of a wide range of believers, non-believers, heterosexuals, and homosexuals. However, even though that may be true, it was not wrong in regards to his beliefs and his Christianity. Due to our government controlling the change in marriage policies, and setting limits that either exclude or include a particular group into the realm of who is allowed to be married, I think Moody and I would agree that President Bush overstepped his boundaries in declaring the previous mentioned statement; for society looks for separation between church and state. As Moody attacks several concepts that focus on marriage and its role in our American history, I am not surprised in her explanation about the history of marriage in the United States; in fact, I agree with her.

The history of marriage in the United States has changed and evolved in so many ways, I will not be surprised if a new evolution regarding marriage comes forth. What I cannot seem to understand is why so many people make a big deal out of homosexuals participating in marital ceremonies but during ancient times no one made an opposition to men having several wives and forcing woman to marry. If the term sacred is going to be attached to a word, especially the term marriage, than everything and everyone should be ordained to have that holy connection with God. Instead of judging people, creating a difference, and casting citizens out, the government should be focused on other issues; for example, why are divorce rates so high?  From my perspective, I feel that the state is trying to impose certain values and morals on a certain group (homosexuals) but not implementing the same values and morals on everyday heterosexual citizens. It is just not right. It should be the decision of the church as to whether or not they will be participants in ceremonies for homosexuals; I don’t feel like the state should have that power because that creates a thin line between the separations of the two institutions. Before our time, society was forcing people to marry and imposed the notion wherein, one was sinful if a ceremony was not performed; but now our society has transformed into a world where one has to fight for this right.

--Lady Zandra

The definition of the word marriage is nothing if not subjective. While Merriam-Webster Dictionary has given the world a universal definition to allow correct use in context, no ones’ marriage is the same. Each marriage is as unique as the individuals within the union. While the previous writer defines marriage as a sacred vow between a man and woman and discusses the implications of the Christian Bible, the words “sacred” and “God” in its articulation when spoken by a government official, and the President, does not threaten the separation of Church and State. The word sacred does mean a connection with God or a dedication to a religious purpose; however, I feel it is important to remember that the “Law of the Land,” and our great constitution was founded upon Christian principles. If we wanted to completely separate Church and State we would need to write an entirely new constitution; for each and every original law was based on Christian morals and principles accepted and practiced during that time. While I do believe that our laws and morals need to evolve as society evolves, I do not believe President Bush crossed any lines with his statement in reference and respect to marriage.

It only makes sense to believe that the evolution of marriage will include the incorporation of same sex marriage. However, we should all keep in mind that this battle will be a hard and lengthy one. The Gay Rights Movement is simply another crossroad of the Christian foundation of the United States of America and our never-ending journey towards equality for all. While a lot of states, as well as the federal government, have taken steps towards providing same sex couples with some of the benefits reserved only for heterosexual couples in the past, a clear line has been drawn in the sand. As I have stated before, our constitution was founded upon Christian principles. This foundation may be amended but it will never be rewritten.

--Lady Shabreka