Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn.
Biological imperatives trump laws. American government cannot fight against marriage and hope to endure. If the Constitution is defined in such a way as to destroy the privileged position of marriage, it is that insane Constitution, not marriage, that will die.
(Orson Scott Card, Mormon Times, July 24, 2008)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elfs
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-08-23 04:58 pm (UTC)"Two or more people, in the sight of family, friends, community and/or deity, pledging their troth to each another, with the purposes of creating a family unit (with or without children) to support and love one another."
then i agree. i will fight any government that tries to reduce the broad spectrum of that ability. ;-)
just a thought.
i had one friend give me the argument that we should redefine marriage as a narrow, religious thing, and create a new term for a new day that embraces all the wonderful love and families out there. She said "civil union" is to sterile... but to create something new rather than fighting the willfully stubborn and narrow minded folks, we step aside and create something new that is morebetter.
eitherway, i'm so happy to see the progress that is happening, and i cringe with every real or potential setback. this is our next fight for civil liberties. and it's the best goal. Freedom of Love.