Here's my response:
CHOICES: Right now you have less choices because you only have one form of marriage. If the gov't didn't give the outlines for the institution then you would have an evolution of marriage. The catholic church could choose people to go to counselling for X hours. Gay people could get married. Certain marriage corporations could have uber contracts for the wealthy. Etc, Etc.
INSURANCE: Gov'ts set tones. If your insurance company required a marriage certificate upon starting coverage you could provide it from wherever you got married. Insurance companies don't cover spouses or children for free so I doubt they'd cry foul.
ALLOWING GOV'T TO DECIDE: The government wouldn't have to decide which marriages to recognize or not. Its not for them to decide; its for the individual to decide.
LEGAL COSTS: Giving church's more authority on who they choose to give marriage contracts to would reduce divorces for their followers. Private organizations who advertised for the lowest divorced rates would have programs to reduce divorces. Private organizations would also do a better job at implementing better marriage contracts that have arbitration clauses. So why doesn't the gov't create better marriage contracts now you ask? Because one size MUST FIT ALL currently. This reduces the ability to evolve the system.
VALIDITY OF AN IDEA: Spirit says that ideas are only good if they are implementable. In the world of immediate gratification she is right. I think, however that debating the complex problems are the most fruitful.
Time is not fixed and every idea starts with the recognition of a problem. Because the masses are not yet aware that there is a problem doesn't mean a problem doesn't exist. Truly great ideas come from recognizing a problem that others do not see (just yet).
|