Letters to the Editor
-
Isn't marriage a a civil union?
I am perplexed by the term "marriage" as opposed to "civil union." As I understand it. Marriage is a civil union carried out by an agent of the state (judge, justice of the peace, clergyman) and licensed by the state. In the eyes of the law, a person is married if he or she (1) has a valid license and (2) is married by someone who is considered qualified to do so by the state. In other words, a religious marriage is a civil union as well. I can clearly remembering my father, a minister, declaring a couple married by the power vested in him by the state. That marriage is a civil union is bolstered by the fact that disolving a marriage is purely a legal, not a religious, process as far as the state is concerned. An annulment or divorce by a religious body without a legal divorce is meaningless if one of the persons involved applies for a marriage license later. In the eyes of the state, he or she would be headed for a bigamous marriage. I do not quarrel with the right of religious denominations to refuse to marry those they feel are not qualified. In fact, that right should be closely guarded. But no religious group should dictate to the state who can or cannot be joined in what is a contractual obligation by both parties. Let the state determine who is qualified to be married. Let religious groups determine who is qualified to be married in religious ceremonies.