Separation of Church and State

[Horizon]

I don't know if a thread has ever been made for this, so I am making one.

Everyone knows how this nation was built on the idea of separation of Church and State? Well, there is one thing that the Church does to under-mind this. Marriage. Marriage falls under state, yet the Church is almost 100% involved in it. And I know Marriage is under state because you get the Marriage license from the state. And without the Marriage license, you are not 'Legally' married. So, you can have wedding at your Church and what not, but you don't have the license, you aren't legally married. But then aren't you required to have a priest at the wedding? (I don't 100% about this, hoping to learn more about it in this thread o.o) Which means, that Church has somehow found a way to nudge it's self into State matters, without it being publicized nation-wide. I think they should train people to do weddings without the Church, because it is none of the Church's business (literally). And if Marriage was left up to the state, we know they would most likely legalize Homosexual Marriage. Now, when I get at this, I don't mean the Church should be outlawed to doing marriage, because that is wrong. There are still religious people who want to get married under the church. I just think, the help separate State and Church better, the state should train officials to do weddings, if a couple doesn't want to do it under the church. I know it seems a bit confusing, still allowing church to do marriages, but come on, that would be extremely rude to take that away from people who have had it for so long. I just feel everything would be a lot better, if the Church wasn't involved in every marriage.

(like I said, I am no expert on this subject, so if they already have Marriage officials, that aren't involved with the church, please tell :) )

[CharlieFinley]

Everyone knows how this nation was built on the idea of separation of Church and State? Well, there is one thing that the Church does to under-mind this. Marriage. Marriage falls under state, yet the Church is almost 100% involved in it. And I know Marriage is under state because you get the Marriage license from the state. So far, so good. However, I think it might have helped if you'd done a bit more research before writing the next bit. And without the Marriage license, you are not 'Legally' married. Right. And with the marriage license, you can be legally married by a judge, ordained minister, visiting head of state, captain of a ship... the list goes on. What does that tell you? It should tell you that the law has allowed an enormous amount of leeway that all who marry might marry in the fashion they choose. However, most couples choose a religious ceremony.

So, you can have wedding at your Church and what not, but you don't have the license, you aren't legally married. But then aren't you required to have a priest at the wedding? (I don't 100% about this, hoping to learn more about it in this thread o.o) No, you are not required to have a priest at the ceremony. Which means, that Church has somehow found a way to nudge it's self into State matters, without it being publicized nation-wide. Even if it were a requirement (it isn't), you're acting like this is a new thing (it isn't). I think they should train people to do weddings without the Church, because it is none of the Church's business (literally). Actually, that's commonly recognized as one of the most important and common functions of the Church. And if Marriage was left up to the state, we know they would most likely legalize Homosexual Marriage. Except it is up to the state, and they haven't.
Now, when I get at this, I don't mean the Church should be outlawed to doing marriage, because that is wrong. There are still religious people who want to get married under the church. I just think, the help separate State and Church better, the state should train officials to do weddings, if a couple doesn't want to do it under the church. I know it seems a bit confusing, still allowing church to do marriages, but come on, that would be extremely rude to take that away from people who have had it for so long. I just feel everything would be a lot better, if the Church wasn't involved in every marriage. They aren't.

(like I said, I am no expert on this subject, so if they already have Marriage officials, that aren't involved with the church, please tell :) ) Consider yourself told. :)

[Horizon]

So far, so good. However, I think it might have helped if you'd done a bit more research before writing the next bit. Right. And with the marriage license, you can be legally married by a judge, ordained minister, visiting head of state, captain of a ship... the list goes on. What does that tell you? It should tell you that the law has allowed an enormous amount of leeway that all who marry might marry in the fashion they choose. However, most couples choose a religious ceremony.
No, you are not required to have a priest at the ceremony. Even if it were a requirement (it isn't), you're acting like this is a new thing (it isn't). Actually, that's commonly recognized as one of the most important and common functions of the Church. Except it is up to the state, and they haven't.
They aren't.
Consider yourself told. :)

Thank you sir, I mean, I know should research stuff first, but this seemed like an easier way to do it :p

[ProudConservative]

Before the US was created, and all that, you had no need for a license. I see this as an infringement on the states part. This was done all by the Church before the State got involved.

[Sir Suomi]

I don't know if a thread has ever been made for this, so I am making one.

But then aren't you required to have a priest at the wedding? (I don't 100% about this, hoping to learn more about it in this thread o.o)

A marriage can be preformed by a judge, I think.

[Gigablue]

Before the US was created, and all that, you had no need for a license. I see this as an infringement on the states part. This was done all by the Church before the State got involved.

Marriage conveys many legal benefits, and thus should fall under the jurisdiction of the state. It used to be a purely religious event, but isn't anymore. Churches should be able to marry whomever they choose, but the state shouldn't be allowed to discriminate. If the church tries to tell the state that they should discriminate, then the church has overstepped it's bounds.

[Cicero]

I think that if a gay couple wanna get married, why not? It will help the economy, and make marriage equal to all.

Heterosexual Marriage ≠ True marriage equality. Heterosexual & Homosexual marriage = true marriage equality.

But here's what I think, if a gay couple wanna get married in a church, but that church refuses. That's the church's right. If a church doesn't want to marry a gay couple, that gay couple should just go off and find another church. No church should be forced to marry anyone. Especially if that church believes it goes against something they believe in.

But a lot more church's are popping up called "New Age churches" which cater to the needs of those who aren't really accepted in other churches.

[Skyline]

I think that if a gay couple wanna get married, why not? It will help the economy, and make marriage equal to all.

Heterosexual Marriage ≠ True marriage equality. Heterosexual & Homosexual marriage = true marriage equality.

But here's what I think, if a gay couple wanna get married in a church, but that church refuses. That's the church's right. If a church doesn't want to marry a gay couple, that gay couple should just go off and find another church. No church should be forced to marry anyone. Especially if that church believes it goes against something they believe in.

But a lot more church's are popping up called "New Age churches" which cater to the needs of those who aren't really accepted in other churches.

I agree 100% I couldn't have said it better.

[Human]

I think it should all be secular

my parents had a marriage with no religion involved, on a cruise ship

[Jean Poutine]

I'd like to add some shit :

365. Marriage shall be contracted openly, in the presence of two witnesses, before a competent officiant.

366. Every clerk or deputy clerk of the Superior Court designated by the Minister of Justice, every notary authorized by law to execute notarized acts and, within the territory defined in the instrument of designation, any other person designated by the Minister of Justice, including mayors, members of municipal or borough councils and municipal officers, is competent to solemnize marriage.

In addition, every minister of religion authorized to solemnize marriage by the religious society to which he belongs is competent to do so, provided that he is resident in Québec, that he carries on the whole or part of his ministry in Québec, that the existence, rites and ceremonies of his confession are of a permanent nature, that he solemnizes marriages in places which conform to those rites or to the rules prescribed by the Minister of Justice and that he is authorized by the latter.

Any minister of religion not resident but living temporarily in Québec may also be authorized to solemnize marriage in Québec for such time as the Minister of Justice determines.

In the territory defined in an agreement concluded between the Government and a Mohawk community, the persons designated by the Minister of Justice and the community are also competent to solemnize marriages.

367. No minister of religion may be compelled to solemnize a marriage to which there is any impediment according to his religion and to the discipline of the religious society to which he belongs.


2. Marriage, for civil purposes, is the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others.

3. It is recognized that officials of religious groups are free to refuse to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs.

That's how it's done. Marriage violates in no way the failed separation concept.