2 ms·
> the consistent position would be to advocate for doing away with the state's monopoly on dictating the terms of marriage (and, consequently, divorce) in the f
by cato_the_elder 4y ago
> the consistent position would be to advocate for doing away with the state's monopoly on dictating the terms of marriage (and, consequently, divorce) in the first place.
Maybe, but that's not the pragmatic position. In foreseeable future, it's unlikely that you can decouple marriage from the state's legal understanding of it.
- Dracophoenix 4y agoMarriage has long preceded the existence of the state and organized religion. The state's "legal understanding", as you put it, is fiction. The pragmatic position isn't to cower in fear and ignorance, but deny and disprove the state's dogma.