3 ms·
Marriage need not be a "government thing" in the modern sense, with all the legal distinctions we currently have. Marriage is inherently a legal thing, in the s
by baddox 11y ago
Marriage need not be a "government thing" in the modern sense, with all the legal distinctions we currently have. Marriage is inherently a legal thing, in the sense that it's a contract between people.
- pohl 11y agoState is a prerequisite for law, except in a libertarian's dorm-room fantasies.
- baddox 11y agoIt depends on your definitions. If you consider all legal systems to be "states," including primitive tribal ones, decentralized ones, etc., then yes, "state is a prerequisite for law" is a tautology. But today, "state" usually refers to a relatively large and relatively centralized organization governing a well-specified region that is recognized by other such states. Using that definition, a state is very clearly not a prerequisite for law.
- pohl 11y agoThe context that allows a system of laws to operate doesn't just spring forth spontaneously from a vacuum. Rather, it exists because we have a government based on the rule of law.
- millstone 11y agoMarriage confers very special rights, such as permanent residency or social security inheritance, that you cannot obtain through private contracts. Therefore the government has to be involved.
- swasheck 11y agothis is the crux of the issue in that government policy is, in large part, based upon a private contract. neither government nor judeo-christian sects (which, if we're honest, is whom we have in view when we speak of "religion") seem to be able to grasp the full implications of this.