Sanctaria wrote:Auralia wrote:Any law that purports to prohibit a private religious institution or organization from recognizing a sacrament called "marriage" unless it is open to same-sex couples is invalid because it is an unjust infringement on freedom of religion. The state has no right to prohibit religious practices when there is no threat to public order, health, safety, or morals.
Don't worry, Ambassador. If your religious organisation wishes to celebrate marriage, but confine it to just couples of different sex or genders, that's fine! This proposal just regulates marriage - it makes it a protected term, if you will. You're free to do the exact same thing, but just call it something different. If private individuals, organizations, or religious institutions want to use a definition of marriage that differs from the state's, they have every right to do so.
How about domestic union? Or civil partnership? I'm sure you can come up with another term that suits your need. After all, as I'm sure you agree, once it does the same thing, acknowledge a couple's love, what matter is the name?
Right?
Notwithstanding your passive aggressive snark, you are attacking a rather obvious strawman. At no point did I ever make the argument that private individuals and organizations should be bound by a state's definition of marriage and should be forced to use a different term if their definition differs.
If a same sex couple wishes to call their relationship a marriage, they have every right to do so. If a religious institution wishes to solemnize same-sex marriages, they have every right to do so. States must still respect freedom of religion, conscience and expression, regardless of how they define marriage.
At least, that is Auralia's position. Sanctaria, on the other hand, appears to believe that the the traditional definition of marriage should be made a thoughtcrime, and that several key beliefs and practices of most world religions should be prohibited.
Martin Russell
Chief Ambassador, Auralian Mission to the World Assembly