Did Ed Snowden do the right thing?
klsmith2020 at yahoo.com
Mon Jun 10 13:26:24 MDT 2013
I'm not sure you can use Old Testament marriage as an example. I'm sure I read somewhere in the Bible God said marrying multiple wives should stop.
I am unable to find where God said to stop the practice of taking multiple wives. I'll keep looking.
This scripture sounds like one man and one woman. Not one man and multiple men.
1 Corinthians 7 New International Version (NIV)
Concerning Married Life7 Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But
since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual
relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. 3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The
wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her
husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his
own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
--- On Mon, 6/10/13, Nicholas Leippe <nick at leippe.com> wrote:
From: Nicholas Leippe <nick at leippe.com>
Subject: Re: Did Ed Snowden do the right thing?
To: "Provo Linux Users Group" <plug at plug.org>
Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 11:51 AM
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:13 PM, keith smith <klsmith2020 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Government has no place in marriage, that includes regulating it and
> taxing it or not taxing it.
I completely agree. "Marriage" should be excluded as part of the separation
of church and state. It's an overloaded construct anyways. We have the
relationship status (often considered religious), and the sharing of rights
bundled. Sharing financial obligations, medical-decision-making,
benefits/insurance, things automatically granted to spouse and next-of-kin
can already be conferred via power of attorney, which is really what
marriage is conferring via side-effect today. The definition of marriage in
regards to who or how many people want to live together and share their
lives should be independent of their conferred/shared rights, which they
should be able to file for as a distinct matter. There should be no filing
at all for declaring the actual relationship status--that's nobody's
business but the parties involved. As for sharing and division of property?
Ditto. We already have pre-nups to overrule the default side-effect status
conferred by the current marriage contract. Why not make that separate and
explicit also rather than as a side-effect?
Christians and other religions that attempt to codify their specific
definition of marriage into law are at odds with separation of church and
state. IMO, gays shouldn't bother trying to get "gay marriage" legalized.
They can already power-of-attorney anything they want. What they should be
after is simply removing any relationship definition at all in the
"marriage" legal status, and get it to just cover conferred rights.
The IRS will always get their money. They will find a way no matter how we
label relationships and different cohabitation combinations.
As programmers this problem is kind of obvious--overloading one variable
where two or more are needed, and eliminating side-effects.
Christians that try to claim that Christian marriage is between one man and
one woman are kind of hilarious--because the history of Christianity, eg
the old testament, is rife with polygamy. Mormons (also Christians)
resurrected that practice, as have other Christian sects. Plenty of
non-Christian faiths also practice polygamy. I don't know of any historical
societies that officially declared their same-sex relationships as official
marriages (doesn't mean they don't exist), but that is definitely not a new
People will live with and love whom they will--that should not be an issue
for any gov't to attempt to decide or codify.
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Don't fear the penguin.
More information about the PLUG