That's still a claim. You are not showing how a religious marriage is not an actual marriage. There are more than one type of marriage. Only one type can be used for legal benefits, but you are not showing how the others do not exist.
For a legal marriage yes. Does not answer the question. How does the existence of a legal marriage cause a religious marriage to not exist? There is no claim that the two are the same, nor that religious marriage qualifies one for legal benefits.
That is a claim. What backs it up? The fact that religious marriage is not used for legal benefits in no way eliminates it's existence. What causes it to not exist? Marriage existed before it was a legal institution. What caused it to no longer exist outside the legal institution?
But you can't prove it. All you can prove is that legal marriage is the only type for legal benefits. You have nothing to prove that religious marriage, a marriage recognized by church and/or a Deity, exists.
@rahl because you seem to be having such difficulty with basic concepts, let's review definitions again. Legal Marriage: a marriage recognized by a government for the purposes of application of laws and legal benefits. The marriage of one government may or may not be recognized by another government or other entities. Religious Marriage: a marriage recognized by a religious organization and/or a deity, for reasons as determined by said religion and/or deity. The marriage of one religion and/or deity may or may not be recognized by another religion/denomination/deity or other entities. Social Marriage: a marriage recognized by a given social grouping for reasons as determined by said social grouping. A marriage recognized by one social grouping may or may not be recognized by other social groupings or other entities. Government doesn't have to recognize a religious marriage, but it does not negate the fact that it is still a marriage per the religion. There is not and never has been any one single definition or type of marriage. Prove otherwise.
Of course I can. We’ve been over this. Go to any church in any state in the country and have a ceremony with no license to file with the state. You won’t be married.
Yes we have been over this. I will have a religious marriage. I will not have a legal marriage. I will have no access to legal benefits. You seem to be under some mistaken impression that a marriage has to include government recognition and/or legal benefits. It is the only thing that I can come up with as to why you think that a marriage of a religious, but not legal, nature cannot exist. But let try a different tack. Other that just simply stating that if a marriage is not legally recognize it is not a marriage, explain to me why. What is the basis for saying that only a legally recognized marriage can be a marriage when we had marriages exist before legal marriage came into existence? What is the basis that causes the existence of legal marriage to destroy the existence of all other marriages?
That is still just a claim. You have not backed it up. Did you read the rest of the post? Explain the basis of your claim. Right now all you have is circular reasoning. Other that just simply stating that if a marriage is not legally recognize it is not a marriage, explain to me why. What is the basis for saying that only a legally recognized marriage can be a marriage when we had marriages exist before legal marriage came into existence? What is the basis that causes the existence of legal marriage to destroy the existence of all other marriages?
Well you said that marriage only applying to opposite sex couples was discrimination on the basis of SEX. So then if the First Amendment only applied to men or only applied to women, (therefore being discrimination on the basis of SEX) would this be the same? And do you agree with that?
Well the only person who is contrary to reality is you, who thinks that there's no such thing as religious marriage. I actually think that you're just trolling this thread. I seriously don't think that you're stupid enough to believe such nonsense. That's because science didn't know any different.
What did I mean by what? It's been a day since I've thought about this nonsense. And I think your criticisms are pointless and Petty so I have forgotten about those. so is this stupid nonsense it's important to you you need to refresh my memory I'm not reading anything because this like many of the conversations I have with you has become stupid.
In reference to what I have no idea what you're talking about. Better yet don't worry about it I don't care. This conversation has become tedious anyway