NationStates Jolt Archive

It seems that though I have expressed my opinion on same-sex marriages several times and have offered alternatives to it, some feel the necessity instead to focus on my moral or religious nature instead of the argument at hand. I will now define my opinion on the issue at hand, that being same-sex marriages and homosexuality in general.
----------

For thousands of years, marriage has been considered the governmental and religious practice of joining a man and a woman as one. That practice has continued to this very day and is now certainly questionable with the necessary rise of the issue of civil rights and the rise of the homosexual agenda (which is not a negative term, for the record).

My nation is a spirtually devout one, opposed to the homosexual lifestyle, but tolerant of those who practice it. As such, when this argument originally came to be, Caligatio was vehemently opposed to same-sex marriages and even civil unions.

Caligatio remains opposed to same-sex marriages, because we feel that homosexuals cannot be married. Its definition, in conjunction with tradition, dictate so. However, our opinion on civil unions has drastically changed.

To solve this problem of inequality, Caligatio has come to this conclusion with the help of the nation of Lubria:

- Marriage should be restricted to a purely religious nature
- Both heterosexual and homosexual couples should be joined by the state in civil unions

This allows for all people of a consenting age (which is decided by the country they inhabit) to enjoy the same benefits and privileges, ensuring equality. It also allows for those people who are religious to be joined in marriage at a religious institution of their choice. Churches, mosques, temples, etc. would not be forced to "marry" anyone, and the state would only deal with civil unions, the legal contract of two consenting adults.

Caligatio has stated before that it would support a resolution that highlighted the above made points, but we now retract that statement. We will implement this program in our own country as we see fit, but the new definition of marriage and its replacement by civil unions may not be appealing to other nations. As outspoken as Caligatio is for national sovereignty, we could not support a resolution pushing this kind of issue on other nations.

Hopefully, this has clarified our position on this issue. Feedback is welcome, but let's try to focus on the issue at hand. That's not so hard, is it?

Todd M.
President of the Confederacy of Caligatio

http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=123823

Unfortunately, it does not seem that people take the time to read the entirety of posts.

Caligatio has stated before that it would support a resolution that highlighted the above made points, but we now retract that statement. We will implement this program in our own country as we see fit, but the new definition of marriage and its replacement by civil unions may not be appealing to other nations. As outspoken as Caligatio is for national sovereignty, we could not support a resolution pushing this kind of issue on other nations.

I will not support this current resolution that the Disaster Area has so kindly posted.

Todd M.
President of the Confederacy of Caligatio

...For thousands of years, marriage has been considered the governmental and religious practice of joining a man and a woman as one...

For many of those years, marriage was between one man and many women. Islam today still allows a man to take up to four wives. Marriage was used for many years as a contract of ownership, not mutual love and devotion. It is only recently that it has generally become a more equal institution.

Lubria understands the religious concerns, and thus allows any religion (a religion being recognized in our state as any group that registers itself as such with our government, and operates under "not for profit" laws, and as such is restricted from giving money to political campaigns, though they may lobby.) to choose how they define marriage. Lubria recognizes all marriages and civil unions preformed by any nation state, so long as they are between consenting adults (as defined by the member state).

I agree compleatly with you, this is a great plan. I see your objections to putting it before the UN/forcing nations, but I will see what I can do to get it there. Thank you for your execelent plan and valuble philosophical knoweledge that you have emparted unto me and The Federation of Pyro Kittens will adopt your plan.

It's moot. The UN already allows gay marriages as part of the Gay Rights act.

That said, I do agree with your definition of the word 'marriage' and agree that 'civil unions' should be used instead, however the Gay Rights bill specifcally states that gays are marriable, so for purposes of nationstates, the usual definition of marriage has changed.

It says that gay marriages must be protected by law, and as I understand Caligato, he is not seeking to protect gay marriage so much as specify that marriage is a religious ceremony preformed by religious institutions that carries with it the rights of a civil union, which is a secular contract between persons. So long as there is freedom of religion (the freedom of religion to dictate how marriage is to take place within their faith, and the freedom to form a religion.) there is no discrimination, and gay marriage is protect, just as straight marriage is. In fact, Caligato’s ideas can extend the idea of marriage. The previous resolution allows for government to force churches to marry homosexual couples. I feel that for any proposal in this area to work we need to make a distinction between civil unions and marriage.

Civil Union - a contract between two or more people made with full consent of the parties. The contract carries with it certain rights and responsibilities afforded to persons in a long term, loving relationship. Such contracts are a purely secular matter, and may be entered into by persons desiring to codify their relationship.

Marriage - a religious ceremony that conveys all the rights and responsibilities of a civil union. The performer of the ceremony (or the religious institution they work for) have final authority in deciding who may participate in the ceremony and how the ceremony is to be preformed.