I Don't Get It

Being a somewhat non-confrontational type, I traditionally don’t put these kinds of controversial opinions on my blog, but this solution seems so freaking simple to me I’m really not getting why it’s so difficult for apparently everyone else.  The never-ending debate is exhausting and I figure I must be missing something.

The government has no business, nor qualifications for deciding anything about the relationship status of its citizen’s personal lives.  The government is run by a bunch of amoral jerks fighting like rabid dogs over power and a popularity contest – are these really the people who should be making relationship calls for anyone?

From the government’s perspective, all that should matter is that two, three, ten, twenty, I don’t care – a whole town full of people who are consenting and at least 18 years of age come to them and say: “We wish to bind our lives together legally.”

Why they wish to do this is not the governments concern, nor is anything that goes on in the bedrooms or social lives of the people who asked.  Their gender; be it man, woman, or “other,” also need not apply.  All they should care about is:

A)    Is this fully consensual?

B)     Are the people involved of legal age?

Those criteria are met?  Great!  Then the government goes: “Okay, here’s the documentation so that you can do that.  Process it, turn it in, and you’re all set.”  I admit it’s not romantic, but at least it’s simple.

Then those people are legally bound and may enjoy the benefits under the law that such a recognized union represents.  They will remain bound until one of them dies, or they decide to process paperwork dissolving their union.

Are they two lifelong friends?  Are they a man and a woman?  Are they two men or two women?  Do they have a romantic relationship or just a business partnership?  WHO CARES?!  Doesn’t matter!  Why they wanted the union is nobody’s business but their own.

Then, if two people would like a marriage, either as a religious ceremony or as a non-religious one, they are free to find a church or non-religious officiant in line with their own beliefs, and have one.  The government should take no more interest in it than they do in baptism or confirmation (which is to say: none).  Individual churches are free to officiate marriages (or refuse to) in line with their own beliefs.  The government will not be required, or able to force a church to perform a ceremony that isn’t in line with their beliefs, nor block two people from having one in a church that agrees to it.

In short: I do not believe that it’s the government’s place to approve nor disapprove the personal relationships of it’s citizen’s.  Should they legally recognize a consensual partnership of some kind?  Yup.  And that’s it.  Hey, guys?  Yeah, you up there on capital hill?  Keep us safe, keep the roads intact – and otherwise, butt out.  Thanks!

Yes, I realize that gay people are still going to have a hard time getting a marriage ceremony in a mosque or deeply conservative church.  Hey, I’d love to have had a bat mitzvah, they sound like a hoot – but not being Jewish and all I doubt I’d be able to find a synagogue to give me one.  Such is life. There are still liberal or non-denominational churches available for such things, or non-religious official types who can be hired to perform whatever lovely wedding ceremonies a couple would like, I’ve been to quite a few.

The point is that by making marriage none of the government’s danged business I genuinely believe that this problem would be solved.

Everyone is free, nobody’s rights are getting stomped on, and everyone is happy.  Right?  Every single person (religious and non-religious alike) I’ve proposed this idea to has thought it was a decent solution.

So WHY is it so hard to make happen?  As far as I know, nobody is even fighting for it because they’re way too busy finding inventive ways to tear one another apart.  Am I missing something?  I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.