The Answer to the Same-Sex Marriage Debate

Recently my home state of Minnesota voted down the proposed Marriage Amendment (the first state to do so, might I add… I’m so proud!), but same-sex marriage is still illegal here. Just less illegal, I guess. Anyway, the occasion got me thinking about this issue and I just had to write something about it. This is not an idea that I came up with—in fact, it’s one shared by a growing number of people. It’s an idea that I believe would at the very least make same-sex marriage a non-governmental problem. Which would really cool things down.

Minnesota Marriage Amendment

Currently, a marriage is a legal union of two people. But it’s also a deeply religious thing for a lot of Americans. And it should not be both. Think about it. The government doesn’t regulate baptisms or funerals; it instead gives out birth certificates and death certificates. Purely secular documents, unattached to the often accompanying religious ceremonies. You know, good old separation of church and state. This is what should be done with marriage in this country.

The government should only give civil unions—to any two people (or more potentially) who want them and meet whatever requirements are in place. This would be strictly for financial and legal purposes. It would have nothing to do with sex. Just the legal and financial rights that traditionally accompany a marriage.

Now, if a couple isn’t particularly religious, they could stop there. They’d have all the benefits. But the marriage ceremonies and certificates would be given solely by churches and other licensed people (let’s say Elvis, in Las Vegas). You would first have to enter into a civil union with your desired partner, but after that you could obtain a “marriage” through whichever church will give you one. There would have to be laws though to protect a church’s right to deny marriage to whomever it wishes, but since a marriage would just be an intangible ceremony with no rights attached to it (like a baptism or confirmation), it’s unlikely people will get too worked up about it.

And wouldn’t that be great? A United States where we can finally take the touchy subject of marriage out of the hands of the government?

Although if a church can marry whomever it wants (as long as they can get a civil union) there will be concerns about how marriage won’t mean anything. But a marriage means something different to everyone, and if you want it to mean something special to you it shouldn’t matter what other people are doing—focus on your own life for God’s sake! Make your marriage mean something.

As for those concerned about slippery slopes and polygamy and marrying farm animals, well… we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it. I guess I’ll leave you with this: have some faith in democracy. If there’s a time when the majority of Americans wants polygamy or interspecies marriage… that’s the price we pay for the best system of government the world’s ever seen. Democracy can be messy, and it’s certainly imperfect, but it hasn’t failed us yet.