Simple solutions

My dad and I got into a bit of a discussion on the whole "Sanctity of Marriage" issue. Since we both think generally in the same way, it can't really be described as a debate, but it was a discussion on the subject matter.

My dad actually came up with a remarkably simple solution which, I think, would basically sweep away any arguments that would come up.

The solution is twofold:

1) make Marriage an institution which is specifically religious. And give them the power to marry whoever they feel they should, and to restrict it as they see fit.

2) begin another institution which has a different name (it doesn't really matter what you call it, as long as you call it something other than "marriage"), and which will be the legal and social equivalent of marriage. This institution will apply to all "marriages" not performed by a religious institution whether they be same-sex or opposite-sex unions, and will be unrestricted on those terms. Religious institutions will have no power over this type of union.

When you think about it, this solution makes a lot of sense:

1) it makes the people who are ranting about the "sanctity of marriage" happy because any homosexuals who "marry" won't have something which is called a marriage. It'll be the exact equivalent of a marriage, and will likely be referred to as a marriage in casual conversation, but it'll technically be something different.

2) it makes any homosexuals who wish to marry happy because they will have the exact same legal rights as a heterosexual who wishes to enter into a non-religiously based union.

3) it makes the churches happy because they have the power to refuse to marry two people on whatever grounds they see fit. If they say they're only going to allow opposite-sex marriages; fine. If they say that they'll also allow same-sex marriages; also fine. If they decide that they're not going to marry people with blond hair, so be it. It's up to them; but they only have this power over unions that are performed within their church.

The only downside to this plan arises if a same-sex couple absolutely wants a religious union. The majority of churches will likely refuse to perform such unions, at least for now. But that's likely to change, eventually, as the various faiths begin to accept homosexuality as a valid lifestyle.

Hmmm. Maybe I should write this up and send it off to the PM...