A Marital Debate

What is marriage? Who decides what true “marriage” is? Is it purely religious? Is it a loving relationship? Or is it the legal term for a couple who has to split the pot if they get a divorce? “Marriage,” as it is seen today by many social conservatives, is a holy unity between husband and wife, an eternal bond making two people (of the opposite sex) one. The true definition of marriage, however, is the question circulating throughout many states in the United States, but specifically in New Jersey. A legislation to legalize gay marriage has already passed in the New Jersey Assembly and now sits on the desk of Governor Christie to be either passed or vetoed. As a rising Republican himself, the pressures of the historically Republican belief that gay marriage should remain illegal surround him, and the governor undoubtedly has not even considered the possibility of passing the bill. He has, however, considered the idea of putting the question to the people of New Jersey in a referendum. Knowing that the socially conservative group will, as they always have, get to the polls to vote down the legislation, the Democrats simply want Christie to pass the bill. The only other option is the 2/3 majority that is required to override the governor's decision. If they get it passed, New Jersey will be just the eighth state to legalize gay marriage, a movement now being paralleled to the women's rights movement and other civil rights issues.

Although I understand and agree with the social conservatives of this country when it comes to the holiness of marriage, I believe that the unity must be looked at in a very different light by the government. Would I support my own church supporting gay marriage? I would not, but “marriage,” as it should be viewed by the government, is the sharing of assets and shelter amongst a couple, no matter what the combination. Marriages do not have to be approved by priests or churchfolk alike, but can be performed at the courthouse without a church or legal establishment within miles of the “ceremony.” If it is the wishes of a gay couple to share their money, their house, and leave their lives and fortunes in the hands of their loved one after death, there should be nothing held against them. It is the government's job to recognize the willingness of so many gay couples to settle down just as nearly all Americans wish to do at some point. The legalization of gay marriage, however, should never be accompanied by a legislation forcing all churches to marry gay couples. The church and the state, just as in the public education of our children, should remain separate and do not need to cross paths anyhow. Marriage in a religious sense and marriage in a legal sense are two completely different topics that must not be confused. Besides, if the government thought of marriage as a holy and binding contract between a man and a woman, then why do they allow nearly half of all marriages to end in divorce? Let gay couples marry just as every other loving couple can; it is a right that all of us should be able to enjoy.

Works Cited

Zernike, Kate. “Gay Marriage, Passed, Awaits Veto by Christie.” New York Times 17 Feb. 2012: n. pag. The New York Times. Web. 17 Feb. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/17/nyregion/veto-awaits-new-jersey-bill-allowing-gays-to-wed.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp>.