| Line 5: |
Line 5: |
| | In most countries, married couples are treated as a single economic entity, and when one partner dies, the other may inherit all of their property in a simpler system than would be required without the marriage. | | In most countries, married couples are treated as a single economic entity, and when one partner dies, the other may inherit all of their property in a simpler system than would be required without the marriage. |
| | | | |
| − | African-Americans were not allowed to marry in all areas of the United States until after the [[Civil War]], and mixed race couples were only allowed to marry in all areas of the US after a 1967 decision in the [[United States Supreme Court]]. | + | African-Americans were not allowed to marry in all areas of the United States until after the [[Civil War]], and mixed race couples were only allowed to marry in all areas of the US after a 1967 decision in the [[United States Supreme Court]]. Conservatives and Christian groups fought to retain these racist laws, but failed. |
| | | | |
| − | Same-sex couples are not allowed to marry in many areas of the world, although this restriction was lifted in April 2001 by [[Holland]] and January 2003 by [[Belgium]], which is causing the destruction of traditional marriage in those countries.<ref>[http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200602280810.asp]</ref> By the end of 2004, same-sex marriage was legal in most [[Canadian]] provinces and in the [[Yukon]] and is now enshrined in Canadian federal law C-38. <ref>[http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marr.htm]</ref> | + | Same-sex couples are not allowed to marry in many areas of the world, although this restriction was lifted in April 2001 by [[Holland]] and January 2003 by [[Belgium]], as well [[Spain]], [[South Africa]], and a growing number of other nations. Stanley Kurtz, an editor of right-wing journal the National Review, argues that this is "destroying" traditional marriage in Sweden.<ref>[http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200602280810.asp]</ref> By the end of 2004, same-sex marriage was legal in most [[Canadian]] provinces and in the [[Yukon]] and is now enshrined in Canadian federal law C-38. <ref>[http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marr.htm]</ref> |
| | | | |
| | ==Marriage in the Bible == | | ==Marriage in the Bible == |
| | | | |
| − | The [[Old Testament]] clearly allows polygyny. (Gen. 4:19, Gen. 16:1-4, Gen. 26:34, Gen. 32:32, Exodus 21:10, Dt. 21:15, Judges 8:30, I Sam 1:1-2, II Sam 12:7-8, I Kings 11:2-3, I Chron. 4:5, II Chron. 11:21, II Chron. 13:21, II Chron 24:3.) This is less common, but never outlawed, in the New Testament. | + | The [[Old Testament]] clearly allows polygymy. (Gen. 4:19, Gen. 16:1-4, Gen. 26:34, Gen. 32:32, Exodus 21:10, Dt. 21:15, Judges 8:30, I Sam 1:1-2, II Sam 12:7-8, I Kings 11:2-3, I Chron. 4:5, II Chron. 11:21, II Chron. 13:21, II Chron 24:3.) This is less common, but never outlawed, in the New Testament. |
| | | | |
| | The Old Testament allows for the purchase of wives (Gen. 29:18, I Sam. 18:25-27). | | The Old Testament allows for the purchase of wives (Gen. 29:18, I Sam. 18:25-27). |
| Line 55: |
Line 55: |
| | Civil marriage is a legal [[contract]]. In the state constitutions of almost all states, this contract must be between one man and one woman. It gives each member certain rights and obligations. Most commonly, these include power of attorney, [[inheritance]] rights, sharing finances, and rights in relation to any children they may have. With the advent of no-fault divorce, most of these rights and obligations can be terminated by either party at any time for any reason. | | Civil marriage is a legal [[contract]]. In the state constitutions of almost all states, this contract must be between one man and one woman. It gives each member certain rights and obligations. Most commonly, these include power of attorney, [[inheritance]] rights, sharing finances, and rights in relation to any children they may have. With the advent of no-fault divorce, most of these rights and obligations can be terminated by either party at any time for any reason. |
| | | | |
| − | The Scandinavian nations and the [[United Kingdom]] allow same-sex couples to gain benefits by registering a legal commitment, although they acquire fewer advantages than opposite-gender couples receive automatically upon marriage.
| + | Most European nations, Canada, South Africa and some US states allow same-sex couples to gain benefits by registering a legal commitment, although as some kind of disincentive scheme, they often acquire fewer advantages than opposite-gender couples receive automatically upon marriage. |
| | | | |
| | In the U.S. there are over a thousand federal benefits to marriage but none to same-sex civil partnerships. Couples registering same-sex relationships receive some state benefits in [[California]], [[Connecticut]], [[Massachusetts]], [[New Jersey]] and [[Vermont]]. Rights accruing from same-sex marriages contracted in other states are respected in [[Rhode Island]], and some restricted benefits are available to same-sex partners in [[Hawaii]] and [[Maine]].<ref>[http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marr.htm]</ref> | | In the U.S. there are over a thousand federal benefits to marriage but none to same-sex civil partnerships. Couples registering same-sex relationships receive some state benefits in [[California]], [[Connecticut]], [[Massachusetts]], [[New Jersey]] and [[Vermont]]. Rights accruing from same-sex marriages contracted in other states are respected in [[Rhode Island]], and some restricted benefits are available to same-sex partners in [[Hawaii]] and [[Maine]].<ref>[http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marr.htm]</ref> |