Kathleen and I; Domestic Partners.On January 1st, 2008, my wife and I intend to file for domestic partnership rights under Oregon’s new provisions. I see this as a matter of principles that symbolizes my support for the concept that any two consenting adults should be able to enter an economic and emotional partnership without government imposing lopsided religious judgments on them. I encourage my fellow Oregonians to join us. Embrace the proposition that religious ceremonies should have little influence on the legal pairings recognized by government. I figure that anyone who might take offense is likely someone I won’t mind offending. The prudes who see domestic partnership as a threat to “the sanctity of marriage” would be appalled that Kathleen and I were married by a new-age witch some eighteen years ago. With Mormon, Jewish, and Catholic parents, we figured we were bound to offend someone, particularly our own sensibilities, if we went with a religious ceremony. So we asked around and found a licensed acquaintance who would perform our ceremony with minimal religious mumbo-jumbo. As I recall, for $50 we got the basic “do you promise…” ceremony. We didn’t recite anything of our own – we figured we were paying Joyce to do the talking. We didn’t know much about Joyce’s religious background. We knew she had a California ordination in some obscure organization. As we approached our November wedding date, we were surprised to see Joyce on the cover of the local paper’s weekend supplement a few days before Halloween. It seems Joyce was one of several local “Witches” featured in the pre-Halloween edition. So, registration for domestic partnership might even seem an upgrade from the godless state of sin in which some would accuse of living. Sinful or not, we’re comfortable with the eighteen years we’ve had. The “sanctity” of our marriage seems to have little to do with the trappings of the ceremony. I’ve seen plenty of marriages sanctified by the trappings of church and religious dogma – yet dysfunctional and hardly enviable. So, I’m looking forward to January 1 and the sanctity of redundant state recognition of our household. For the “conservatives” who balk at the separation of church and state, perhaps state recognition of our domestic partnership will confer religious credibility on our household. Michael Previous: Parental Rights -- Next: OK, so who would I vote for? Comment from Boggywoggy: Well, 1st hubby and I were married by a local potter, who wore a kimono and asked me to write the entire ceremony out, which I did. 2nd hubby and I went to the courthouse. Posted by Boggywoggy Aug 6, 08:54 AM # Comment from Plateman: Well this pretty much takes the cake , a full fledged tree hugger pretending to be a conservative. What’s next polygamy ? Posted by Plateman Aug 17, 07:57 PM # Comment from Michael: Tree hugging? Perhaps that would be a technique to approximate its circumference and estimate the board-feet. Conservatism should be about keeping the government off our backs – not using the government to ensure the “sanctity” of religious rites. Posted by Michael Aug 18, 08:40 AM # |
Favorite Posts:
Other Blogs:Links:
Feeds - SFP updates for your homepage:Previous Posts: |
