Still in my religious rant frame of mind I had a discussion last night about how beliefs set the framework for moral choices and how they may (or for me may not) affect one's government. There are certain very obvious actions that should be forbidden based on their obvious potential for physical and psychological harm to another human being. (Murder, rape, pedophilia, abuse, just to name a few of the biggies). But if in the final analysis of the situation the only reason to deny an action or right is based solely on your religious belief than you must, in this free society, suck it up and allow it no matter how you personally feel, ie:

I can find no reason to outlaw polygamy other than religious bigotry. Polygamy is the poster child for the far right (along with bestiality) and the flag that is waved in the face of the legitimate fight for equality for gay and lesbians who wish to enter into a union similar to the religious ceremony of marriage that is a recognized contract by the federal and state governments. This is not to say the act of statutory rape and pedophilia that was practiced in the name of polygamy by the Mormon Church should be allowed. That form of abuse falls under the black and white categories above with the general understanding that children, by definition, may not give consent. What I am saying is that I can find no reason why multiple consenting adults (bestiality falls under animal abuse) should not be allowed to enter into a contract similar to the one recognized now as a "civil union between two persons" other than religious belief. Not only that but I think "Marriage" as we understand it in our political system needs to be removed to the church and replaced with the more generic and less restrictive civil union. No one type of union would be "separate yet equal" and religious folk would be free to participate in their own religious rituals separate from the American Civil Union. All Americans would be required to register their decision to form a Civil Union if they wished to receive the benefits afforded such unions in this country.

Here is a thought though: Why is marriage a institution afforded benefits above and beyond American citizenship alone? Why should married citizens be taxed at a lesser rate than single citizens? In fact why should children afford reduced responsibility? After all, children place a huge burden on the infrastructure of the country in the form of the cost of education. That is not even taking into consideration the financial systems in place to protect children in this country from irresponsible people who have children they either can�t afford or simply do not want who must now be cared for all or in part by federal and/or state programs funded by tax dollars.

Perhaps the solution to the dilemma is to remove all fiscal benefits to marriage. Religious groups may then choose to marry whom they choose, everyone is treated equally despite marital status and no one will need to protect themselves from those terrible immoral sorts thinking they can have what good moral people enjoy as a matter of right. As for the children, well, if you want them by all means have them but be sure that you can continue to shoulder your share of the financial burden of this country. You have rights and privileges in these United States but that comes with responsibility. Levels of responsibility should not be doled out based on a religious sense of entitlement due to an illusionary (perceived) superior moral standing.

I wish you Peace

~alison~

�