May 9, 2012
Marriage and Freedom of Association

As free people in a (supposedly) free society.  We have a natural right to associate freely with one another.  So long as you and I (and even others) are happily and consensually together and not interfering with others, we should be able to do more or less whatever we want (in the eyes of the state).  The role of government is to be there in case the rights of a person or their property are violated.

In the case of marriage, government should only be involved when the parties break up and cannot split their possessions amicably, and need a neutral arbiter to do so.  Government should not be in the business of deciding who can and cannot be considered married in the first place.  This is a violation of our natural right to freely associate with one another.

If I want to consider myself married to a man, I should have the right to live with that man free from interference from the State.  If I want to marry a Black woman, I should have the right to live with that person free from interference from the State.  When this principle is not followed, very bad things happen: That’s right, in Virginia in 1959, police raided a family home in the middle of the night because the husband and wife were of mixed races.

Using the force of government to prevent free people from freely associating with one another is always wrong.  It is the ultimate form of Big Government to support the government being involved in our bedrooms.

I have very traditional beliefs on what I believe marriage is.  I believe marriage is a Sacrament.  I believe marriage is only between a man and a woman open to life at some point in their marriage.  I believe that marriage is a covenant relationship between two spouses called to die to themselves and serve the other.

This does not mean that I have the right to use the force of government to impose my definition of a word on other people.  Just as the government should not be in the business of regulating the proper formula for Baptism, government should not be involved in determining what constitutes the “best” possible relationship.  If we believed this, then government should also provide us with the “best” possible food, the “best” possible housing, etc.  We are allowed to make bad food choices, why are we not free to freely make bad relationship choices?  

At any rate, it isn’t the government’s job to defend the sanctity of marriage.  That is the job of the people and private organizations.  It is our job as the Church to live out our vocations and live healthy relationships with one another.  It is our job as Church to prepare couples for marriage, and support them in their marriages.  Overtime, society will hopefully see a group of people living out happy and holy relationships, and seek to emulate us.  That is how change is supposed to come about in society.  This is what we as Church should strive for. 

  1. exfidefiducia reblogged this from crusadermaximus and added:
    okay, my fellow tumblr Catholics….let’s get to work on this.
  2. vwcg reblogged this from crusadermaximus
  3. newsfeederlive reblogged this from crusadermaximus
  4. lowlytree reblogged this from crusadermaximus
  5. crusadermaximus posted this