Nov 9 2011: From what I understand, that is already how it works...If you get a civil marriage that is regulated by the state, but your religious marriage is still regulated by your religion. A "civil marriage" can be terminated with divorce/annulment but the religious marriage in some religions is not terminated in the eyes of their church until it is dealt with by the church in their own way (I'm thinking Orthodox Jew, Mormon temple marriage, etc.)... So if you have a problem with how a certain religion deals with divorce then maybe you shouldn't get married by that church... You choose your religion and you choose what church marry's you, so that would be up to the individual. So it wouldn't really be different (in that way) with what I proposed, the main difference would be the language - government would only offer "civil union" and it would be available to any 2 consenting adults, and religions could offer "marriage" they same way they always have. Right?
I appreciate your comments. I'm actually writing a policy paper on this right now and am very interested in uncovering any possible holes in this option.
TEDCred score: 0.00 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A reply on Conversation: What if "civil union" (and the related benefits/rights) were regulated by the government and "marriage" regulated by individual religions?
I appreciate your comments. I'm actually writing a policy paper on this right now and am very interested in uncovering any possible holes in this option.