It's Just a Piece of Paper

This whole marriage thing is getting out of hand, which would be fine if it was the state’s hands the marriage thing was getting out of.  I mean, seriously, does the piece of paper individuals are prancing around with in San Francisco, with looks of ecstasy in their eyes, “legitimize” the happiness and commitment two individuals pledge between each other?  All hail the state, which, in its infinite goodness, has recognized our union.  Amen and amen.

The only real issue here is in regards to property rights.  Do I, as an individual, have a right to designate another individual, as the beneficiary of my property which the state or a financial institution holds in my name?  The state holds my property, monies taken, unjustly, in the form of taxes because the state does not think I can manage my financial affairs judiciously enough to benefit myself until the time I am unable to provide for myself through my labors.  If I and my spouse don’t have a piece of paper from the state which acknowledges our union, upon my death, my spouse would be denied access to monies owed me by the state.  Is that just?  In the private sector, I can designate monies accumulated to whomever I desire.  The state has no control, which is as it should be.

Health insurance coverage, though for many people is supplied through private business arrangements, is, in actuality, simply an arm of the state.  Health insurance carriers, for the most part, will not cover any partner I may choose to cohabitate with unless I have that piece of paper from the state.  Shouldn’t health insurers only basis for extending coverage to an individual be, can the individual afford the premium based on the risk factors the insurer establishes?  There is no reason for the insurer to bend their business practices to the vagaries of the state.

It is interesting to read various individuals’ responses to what is currently happening in San Francisco.  John Derbyshire quotes Samuel Johnson on martyrdom.  Arnold, supports the rule of law, and Micha Ghertner at Catallarchy offers real insight into this.  Andrew Sullivan views the happenings in San Francisco as “classic civil disobedience." Which I would agree with, which in turns means Andrew should think this is classic civil disobedience.

Thinking about this while walking last night, I kept returning to this email that Sullivan posted from a reader.

"I’d been mulling over this option and although Valentine’s Day isn’t the most opportune time to suggest it, I took advantage of a long car ride this morning to run something past my wife. “If they passed the FMA or if Colorado (where we were married) or Virginia (where we now live) passed some same sex marriage ban, would you consider opting out of our marriage in favor of a civil union.” Before I could explain my rationale she answered, “Oh, absolutely.” Reminded for the 10,000th time why I married her."

So, this morning, I took the marriage license, which legitmizes, in the eyes of the state, my union with the lovely Melis out of the fireproof box.  I sat down with Melis and said, “Let’s burn this.” When she asked “Why?,” I said to her it means nothing to us, it is simply a chain which has been attached to us by the state to legitimize their theft of our dollars for our supposed benefit in our old age.  The only benefit of that piece of paper is to enable Melis or I to petition the state for our property, which the state holds, unjustly, to conform us to the state’s idea of how we should live.  She agreed.  Burn your marriage license.

Marriage is not contained in a piece of paper.

Posted by on 02/18 at 05:42 AM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


Next entry: "Ethics Missionaries"

Previous entry: A Very Good Idea or a Very Bad Idea?

<< Back to main