In response to:

Beck, Marriage and The State of The Union

suz Wrote: Dec 09, 2012 3:50 AM
government encouraged (w/incentives taxes, etc.) people towards marriage because it was good for family life, thus good for the country, but this is also an incentive, a nudge, in the wrong direction. if people want to be together, what's the drawback to NOT having a marriage certificate, certified by the justice of the peace? if love is true, none of this will matter. we can make up our own contracts. we often make up our own vows, do we not?
David3036 Wrote: Dec 10, 2012 3:41 AM
The way the laws are written now, making your own contracts will not even come CLOSE to giving you the same rights and benefits that are included in about 1,100 federal laws and hundreds of state laws. They are includedin inheritance laws, Social Security regulations dealing with survivors benefits, veterans benefits, immigration law, military spousal privileges such as free milirary healthcare, etc. Only MARRIAGE grants those rights under the law.

Other than that, there's no reason for the government to be involved in marriage.

My buddy, Glenn Beck, has made a great contribution to the TEA party movement and to a renewal of popular interest in our Founding Fathers and their ideals. For all that he deserves praise.

But, I believe, he is making a serious error in abandoning the civil right of marriage. The Republican Party was founded in opposition to two historic wrongs. The party’s first platform in 1856 denounced “slavery and polygamy—the twin relics of barbarism.” Slavery was finally put down with a terrible toll—630,000 Americans dead in the Civil War. The new movie, Lincoln, tells the dramatic story of the...