I'll venture a shot at why marriage should be managed by the State.
I think the idea will be similar to why privacy is not part of the Constitution. In particular, if one allows privacy, then it also entails that one may use privacy to commit acts which are contrary to freedom (an example would be murdering someone in the privacy of your home).
I think that a similar argument should hold true for marriage. Marriage should be managed by the State so that the rights of the people involved are not open to compromise and unfair treatment.
In other words, I could see the possibility that a religious instution could have marriage laws which over-rule existing civil rights.
For example, it might be possible to say what when one is married, the wife loses equal rights, such as the right to vote.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
momijizukamori
no subject
Date: 2004-09-19 19:30 (UTC)I think the idea will be similar to why privacy is not part of the Constitution. In particular, if one allows privacy, then it also entails that one may use privacy to commit acts which are contrary to freedom (an example would be murdering someone in the privacy of your home).
I think that a similar argument should hold true for marriage. Marriage should be managed by the State so that the rights of the people involved are not open to compromise and unfair treatment.
In other words, I could see the possibility that a religious instution could have marriage laws which over-rule existing civil rights.
For example, it might be possible to say what when one is married, the wife loses equal rights, such as the right to vote.
-- Jacob