Christianity considers marriage as a sacrament and not just joining of two people in a social-economic contract. But, in secular world, marriage could at best be defined as a socio-economic contract registered by state and privileged to some legal rights. This contract, let us define it as a registered union of two or more people, may entitle the individuals to inheritance from the union and other rights defined by the union contract and the state.
The union of two people may not be registered by the state and still could have legal rights. One fundamental demand for the union may be impositions for providing the cost of care would a child is created during the union; this is a consideration irrespective of the duration of the union. In a union of a male and a female, law would impose cost of care on the male. The male could be the genetic father, but also could not be the one. Should all union contracts have a clause to eliminate this imposition of the cost of the care "child support" if the genetic relationship is not validated? Should all children be tested at birth not only for some inherited diseases, but also the genetic linkage to the caretaker "often father"?
Do you feel emotionally more at ease if the union of a male and female was a marriage and blessed as sacrament? Has adultery created both psychological and social difficulty in our modern society? If adultery is an accepted practice, then should the name “marriage with connotation of a ”sacramental practice” be replaced with the word ‘Union” in the contract? In our society free from the religious constrains, should prostitution (a service for pay) be legally available? This action, like many European societies, would allow safety of sexual encounter by medical-legal licensing of prostitution? Are we living in a society full of hypocrisy by accepting adultery, but pronouncing prostitution as a sinful act?
No comments:
Post a Comment