Marriage and Man’s Law
Many claim marriage is a religious institution and has been for eons. Of course this disregards the fact that couples can marry without the intervention of a church or religion.
But the fact is, additional rights of marriage are of man’s law, not God’s law.
Therefore, the preacher who marries you must have a license provided by man’s law in order for your marriage to be legally recognized.
If the preacher who marries you does not have this license, provided by man’s law, then your marriage is not legally recognized and you can not legally obtain the additional benefits of marriage provided by man’s law.
In other words, if marriage was simply religious, there would be no civil benefits. No tax breaks, no inheritance laws, no social security benefits, etc. and above all, the preacher wouldn't need a piece of paper from the state saying he/she can legally marry others.
Regarding the legal benefits of marriage, your preacher is acting as a representative of the state (man’s law) when he/she marries you, not a representative of God. God can not grant you legal benefits since they are of man, not of God.
Our government provides these benefits with prejudice!
Our government, by this action (or inaction), is dictating who we may love.
Four words seem appropriate here “the pursuit of happiness”.
My happiness can not be dictated to me. I get to decide what makes me happy.
It is not for my government or its' peoples to define, regulate or restrict my pursuit of happiness which is constitutionally guaranteed.
This is about man's law, or, as many call it, civil law, which makes it a civil rights issue, not a religious one.
But the fact is, additional rights of marriage are of man’s law, not God’s law.
Therefore, the preacher who marries you must have a license provided by man’s law in order for your marriage to be legally recognized.
If the preacher who marries you does not have this license, provided by man’s law, then your marriage is not legally recognized and you can not legally obtain the additional benefits of marriage provided by man’s law.
In other words, if marriage was simply religious, there would be no civil benefits. No tax breaks, no inheritance laws, no social security benefits, etc. and above all, the preacher wouldn't need a piece of paper from the state saying he/she can legally marry others.
Regarding the legal benefits of marriage, your preacher is acting as a representative of the state (man’s law) when he/she marries you, not a representative of God. God can not grant you legal benefits since they are of man, not of God.
Our government provides these benefits with prejudice!
Our government, by this action (or inaction), is dictating who we may love.
Four words seem appropriate here “the pursuit of happiness”.
My happiness can not be dictated to me. I get to decide what makes me happy.
It is not for my government or its' peoples to define, regulate or restrict my pursuit of happiness which is constitutionally guaranteed.
This is about man's law, or, as many call it, civil law, which makes it a civil rights issue, not a religious one.
Comments