Marriage is not a right

There’s this little debate going on about marriage in South Carolina today. Something about marriage rights.

I recently got married.

Really, I did.

I’m by no means an expert on this whole marriage thing, but I can tell you one thing: I didn’t have the right to get married.

This will sound asinine to many. Of course, I had the right to marry whoever I wanted. This is America. But that’s not how marriage works.

Marriage is not a right. Rights belong to individuals; marriage by definition must involve two people.

When I proposed to my now wife in April, she could have turned me down. When we asked our preacher if he would do the counseling and ceremony, he could have told us to take a hike or refused on grounds that we weren’t good for each other (That should happen more often.). The venues we used for said celebration could have been booked or not felt like having wedding related things that day or time. We could also have never been able to get to the county offices to get a license, and if we did, the judge could still have refused for various reasons.

Rights are also inalienable, regardless of what a government says. No one can rightly force you to adhere to a religion you don’t believe, nor can they rightly go through all your crap without cause. Rights aren’t dependent on what year it is or on getting a piece of paper from someone whose salary is derived from the forced redistribution of the citizenry’s incomes.

However, there are cases when one can have a marriage rightfully terminated, namely in the case of divorce over unrepentant adultery.

My wife didn’t have to assent to my marriage request. I couldn’t legally stop her if she left. I have no right to be married. If anything, I gave up rights in order to be married, because my marriage is ultimately not about me.

Let the record show that even as a theologically conservative Christian, I’ve gone this entire blog without bringing up biblical passages addressing the complimentarian nature of marriage, which would have made this blog easier.

Nevertheless, the point stands that marriage is not a right for anyone. It can rightfully be refused to you, and your feelings on a subject or biological rumblings don’t get to define what it is.

I’d like to know your reactions to this, but keep it civil.

Advertisements

The Dalai Lama’s endorsement of gay marriage is hypocritical

The Dalai Lama came out last week in support of homosexual marriage, saying that sex of any kind is fine as long as it’s consensual.

I have to take this opportunity to show you that this stance is entirely hypocritical. In fact, Buddhism itself is illogical.

And has some serious freakin’ ear lobes.

Buddhism’s chief goal is to eliminate desire, and it says that desire is the root of every problem. The inconsistency is that any kind of marriage, sex or relationship is based in some kind of desire. Mr. Lama is encouraging his followers to pursue the exact thing his religion is seeking to eliminate.

Oops.

Honestly, the problem lies within Buddhism itself. It’s goal is to end desire, but that’s a desire. It’s a self-defeating system.

I know I’ll piss off a few people, but I have to call them as they are. Dalai Parton is the head of a religion that literally works against itself, and he just encouraged more failures of his own system.