Obamas Regulatory Czar to Abolish Marriage<!-- google_ad_section_end --> <HR style="COLOR: #ffffff; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=1 itxtvisited="1"><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message --><!-- google_ad_section_start -->The U.S. government should abolish its sanctioning of marriage, argued Cass Sunstein, Obama's regulatory czar. (you can't make this crazy stuff up from BO's crowd) Sunstein proposed that the concept of marriage should become privatized, with the state only granting civil union contracts to couples wishing to enter into an agreement. Sunstein explained marriage licensing is unnecessary, pointing out people stay committed to organizations like country clubs and homeowner associations without any government interference. "Under our proposal, the word marriage would no longer appear in any laws, and marriage licenses would no longer be offered or recognized by any level of government," wrote Sunstein and co-author Richard Thaler in their 2008 book, "Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness." In the book, Sunstein explains his approach would ensure that "the only legal status states would confer on couples would be a civil union, which would be a domestic partnership agreement between any two people." He proposed marriage not be recognized by the government. Marriages would instead be "strictly private matters, performed by religious and other private organizations," he wrote. "Governments would not be asked to endorse any particular relationships by conferring on them the term marriage," added Sunstein. Sunstein slammed current government recognition of marriage as "an official license scheme." http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=113802
Well, I'm gonna have to agree with him(to a point). Marriage licenses were so a black slave could marry a white woman. This is according to Black's law dictionary. Marriage licenses are unconstitutional. Licenses also give the right of the state to take your children as the state is involved in the contract and there for have a stake in them. However we would need a common law court which doesn't exist to resolve issues.
I also tend to agree TO A POINT. True marriage is a union under God between a MAN and a WOMAN, period. The states can license anything they want - but anything different isn't marriage. If the FedGov wants to take Government out of marriage - fine. Any union they allow other than that above - will be an abomination - they will end up in the appropriate place.
I may have a decimal point off by one, but if memory serves, our present tax code is something like 66,000 pages long. . Can you even begin to imagine the confusion and additional pages of tax code this is going to require to clarify things tax wise? !!!
I too agree that the government has no constitutional authority where marriage is concerned. I never heard the racial aspect before but I don't doubt it. I understood that it originated for public health reasons. So the government could test marriage applicants for diseases. Whatever the reason, marriage is and should remain the dominion of the church not the state.
YOU ARE RIGHT. Not too many people know this. I am actually surprised. I have nothing further to add.
BINGO! Quig wins the "I got it the quickest" award. The only reason for this is so that the Government can more easily recognize that abomination of God union called same sex marriage. Means more money for the .gov.
