The Institution of Marriage

[Sally]

Marriage, in my view, is a natural and social institution for all people, be they Jews, Muslims or pagans. I believe it was Thomas Aquinas, in Summa Theologiae Moralis, who defined marriage as a union to generate offspring to propagate the human race. If this type of marriage is witnessed by some authority (civil or religious), it is certainly legitimate.

For Catholics, though, marriage is more than a natural contract between two parties; it is a sacrament. Christ himself elevated marriage to the level of a sacrament. Though most Protestant churches don't recognise marriage as a sacrament, a marriage between two baptised people is considered sacramental.

Protestantism, the Enlightenment and the French Revolution all changed marriage considerably. A ceremony in the Church was no longer sufficient for a couple to be considered married before the state, something I firmly disagree with. I do not believe that the state is the only necessary witness. Recently, I heard that in Germany, couples have the right to a marriage only in the Church, and can bypass the civil marriage. Who chooses this option (and why) is of extreme interest to me.

[Angantyr]

The state has no business in regulating my relationship and love for another person. That is a matter between me and her (and the Gods).

If two fags, a poodle and a Victorian chair want to get "married", that is their business. The state should neither sanction nor condemn. If they sign a contract of support, it should merely be a matter of contract law and nothing else.

(My case is somewhat unique. I have to marry my beloved in a civil ceremony for immigration reasons. I want to marry my beloved in a religious ceremony, without state involvement for moral and faith reasons. The first one has legal effect...the second one confirms us as a couple.)