• technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    It’s pretty wild how married people are privileged by the state, etc. Marriage is a religious institution. It shouldn’t be recognized by the state at all. It’s just a tool for patriarchy, control, etc. That’s the root of this conflict over “gay marriage”. The state is butting into something that’s completely religious. Instead of the state promoting “marriage”, we should value and respect all social relationships.

    • ____@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      In fairness, marriage does provide a relatively consistent and arguably fair baseline for unwinding certain large life decisions and transactions (home purchase, kids, etc) that would otherwise be exceptionally problematic for the state to divide up between parties at scale.

      Eliminating gender and related elements from marriage seems a more logical solution to me, as the legal institution serves a valid purpose.

      Unfortunately, given “full faith and credit,” and delegation of powers to states, I don’t see an effective way to wipe away the unnecessarily specific definitions of marriage in each state - that puts us back to square one.

      One can and may substitute a large stack of paperwork for many of the automatic legal benefits and protections of marriage. It’s hardly a perfect 1:1 replacement, and doesn’t keep up with legal changes automatically, as court rulings about applicability of statutes broadly tend to.

    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      marriage is not nor has it ever been a purely religious institution in the history of human kind and in the modern world.

      there was not a single mention of religion or spirituality when I got married 6 years ago, it was not in a church, nor was there anyone of an official religious capacity present.