Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

"Privatize Marriage Now" - Thoughts?

Ann Coulter, that warmongering demagogue of Conservatism, has declared war on Ron Paul. Naturally, she hates Paul because he stands for peace, free markets and the rule of law. Coulter hates of all of these things since she loves war, the police state, and the destruction of the constitution in pursuit of untrammeled political power for Conservative nationalists. In other words, like most Conservatives, she loves socialism, although she prefers to cloak her socialism in words like "national greatness," "secure borders" and "family values."

In a recent column, Coulter attacks Paul for a variety of his pro-freedom positions. In this column, however, I’ll focus only on her wildly inaccurate claims about how marriage is a "legal construct" and how every good American should insist that government maintain its death grip on the institution. She denounces Ron Paul for his insistence that marriage should not be controlled by government and that people should be free to contract with whomever they choose. Coulter of course insists that marriage should be socialized, regulated and controlled by government.

Coulter counters Paul with a claim that "there are reasons we have laws governing important institutions, such as marriage." Well she’s right there. There is a reason that governments regulate marriage: Governments couldn’t resist the urge to seize control of marriage which was a traditionally religious and non-governmental institution.

Let’s briefly examine the history and nature of marriage in the West and see just why we have laws. By "laws" of course, Coulter means secular civil laws. She’s not talking about Canon Law or Church Law, which is what governed marriage throughout most of the history of Christendom.

Being a sacrament, marriage was traditionally governed by religious law and was a religious matter. The Church recognized that with marriage being a sacrament, the state had no more right to regulate marriage than it had the right to regulate who could be baptized or who could be ordained a priest.

Read the rest here ....


Asked by -Eilish- at 10:52 PM on Jun. 17, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

Level 28 (33,578 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (19)
  • Unfortunately with so many legal ramifications of entering into marriage, the government does have to intervene. I think it would be in society's best interest to separate the vocabulary and call religious unions marriage and legal unions just a union.

    Answer by Kitkat61277 at 10:59 PM on Jun. 17, 2011

  • Marriage is not a sacrament, matrimony is. Even in the original Latin it's matrimony, not marriage. Christians can keep matrimony, or fight the Jews and Muslims for it, nobody really gives a damn. Quit screwing with marriage - the legal contract which existed for thousands of years before the bible did.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 11:30 PM on Jun. 17, 2011

  • 1)I don't know whether or not to laugh or just roll my eyes at that first paragraph of unabashed bias. Paul has some viable ideas, but writing him a love letter does no good. (and I don't even like Ann Coulter...)
    2) Ditto Kitkat61277 on the legal issues. Even if marriage was privatized, what about divorce? Child custody? Alimony? Would community property laws be enforceable? The list goes on...

    Answer by TikiWiki33 at 10:03 AM on Jun. 18, 2011

  • I love Ann Coulter, she is hilarious in her ability to point out the stupidity of the left.

    Answer by Carpy at 5:44 PM on Jun. 18, 2011

  • Does the beginning of this really say Conservatives love Socialism? HA! That's a new one to me.

    Answer by HollyBoBolly at 6:57 AM on Jun. 19, 2011

  • I'll come back to this when I get off my phone and on my laptop. Responding so I don't forget about it. Oh! And BTW, thanks for the chuckle anon in showing you didn't read the article at all.

    Answer by Trinity001 at 11:27 PM on Jun. 17, 2011

  • I must say I agree with Kitkat.

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 10:35 AM on Jun. 18, 2011

  • Also agree with kitka

    Answer by Dkhilly at 11:44 AM on Jun. 18, 2011

  • And I am not a Ron Paul fan. I respect him to a degree on fiscal matters, but in other matters he is the Dennis Kucinich of the right.

    Answer by Carpy at 5:45 PM on Jun. 18, 2011

  • I do not understand her??

    She is wrong about Ron Paul! He is what we need!

    They all want Romney or that chick, I forgot her name.

    What a joke!


    Answer by gammie at 1:24 AM on Jun. 18, 2011