18
Is Marriage a Right or a Privilege?
Posted under GLBTQ issues, Political by Recovering Straight GirlSomething to think about today. It’s a thought that I had and discussed with HG over the weekend. Is Marriage a Right or a Privilege? What makes something a “Right” and what makes something a “Privilege?” We’ve always been told that “Driving is a Privilege, not a Right,” and “Voting is a Privilege.”
What about Marriage?
To help this discussion, I thought I would utilize the dictionary as a start.
Right: legal entitlement to have or obtain something or to act in a certain way. (Oxford American Dictionary).
In the jurisprudence and the law, a right is the legal or moral entitlement to do or refrain from doing something, or to obtain or refrain from obtaining an action, thing or recognition in civil society (Wikipedia).
1: qualities (as adherence to duty or obedience to lawful authority) that together constitute the ideal of moral propriety or merit moral approval2: something to which one has a just claim: as a: the power or privilege to which one is justly entitled <voting rights> <his right to decide> : the cause of truth or justice (Merriam-Webster)
Privilege: special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people (American Oxford Dictionary)
A privilege—etymologically “private law” or law relating to a specific individual—is a special entitlemen immunity granted by a government or other authority to a restricted group, either by birth or on a conditional basis or (Wikipedia).
a right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor (Merriam-Webster).
What do you all think?
Check out this marriage “Panic Years” video- http://www.tangomag.com/tangovideos?videoId=1459158698
It’s all about a legal arrangement, AND LOVE (in case my spouse is reading this) so I would have to say it’s a right.
Marriage should be a Right in the eyes of the govn’t if not for the basic human capacity to love but because its the decision to bind yourself to another person (financially, emotionally)… And anyone should be able to do that….
Spandex - It’s a privilege, NOT a right.
As a religious ceremony, marriage is a rite: and is conferred by the clergy on whatever rules that religious body wishes to establish. They can ‘marry’ whomever they wish, and exclude the rite from whomever they wish.
Marriage as a civil right, and as currently construed in most states is a limited right: given on to heterosexuals. And this I believe is unconstitutional in that as a civil/legal ceremony it is fundamentally a contract between two people, who by the terms of the contract are agreeing to certain privileges and obligations and doing so with the civil laws to back up their contract.
By my views, any religious body can refuse the marriage rite to me and my same sex partner. But in no case should the civil authorities be allowed to prevent us access to the unique civil contract known as marriage. It is my RIGHT to be married; unfortunately the state as established marriage as a PRIVILEGE for “heterosexuals only”.
P.ss on the state for violating my RIGHT to marriage.
I believe it to be both. I had the privilage of meeting and marrying KC. (and the right to run away to Reno and do it on our terms)
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Therefore, I believe that not only is being able to marry a privilage, but a right. It falls under a persons right to pursue happiness. (and the liberty to obtain said happiness) OR it could be taken this way, you have the privilage to marry and the RIGHT to choose who you marry.
No where in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independance does it specify who gets the rights and who does not.
Unless you want to take it “litterally” then only men get those things. So I guess it is only OK for Men to choose to marry a woman or a man. But us Ladies get the shaft.
There will always be the folks that interpert the law to suit their agenda. (look at churches and how different churches interpert the Bible to suit their religious agendas.)
Oh, and AMEN Donna in Atlanta!!!! Well put!
Well, based upon the literal definitions, it would seem that marriage is a “right,” although suddenly it becomes a “privilege” of sorts if it is withheld from a certain group of individuals. So, in a sense it seems like those opposing our equality laws wish for marriage to be a “privilege” only reserved for them. OK, I’m dizzy!
I loved the spandex comment! 
It should be everyone’s right..to marry who they love. But it is a privilege to be married to my spouse, because I love him so much and vice versa. I guess I say “It’s a privilege” because I feel lucky to have found the person I married. But it should also be the right of all who love and choose to marry!
A very complex question. But legally, I feel if it’s a right for one, it’s a right for all. I would also consider it a privilege over and above that right.
Marriage…probably more a religious rite as mentioned above, but straight people can curtail the whole religious aspect by going to the justice of the peace.
.
Still, the issue to me has to do with equal protection and rights under the law. I’ve been with my partner for 11 years. Why does he have to have renter’s insurance? Why could his relatives contest his will? Why can’t we adopt children? Why couldn’t I visit him in the hospital? We pay taxes. We contribute to the community. We do everything our straight counterparts do except conceive.
These are the questions, as far as I’m concerned. Marriage may be a privilege, but I view these other issues connected to it as rights. Just because someone else’s religion does not should be irrelevant. Isn’t that how the whole separation of church & state thing is supposed to work?
A right to a rite?
Marriage is a right, and not a privilege, just as voting is a right.
The people against gay marriage want to make us, and others, think it is a privilege that we haven’t earned. Straight people don’t earn the privilege of getting married, it is their right, and it is ours too.
Whatever country you live in.
It is a right that is trying to be hoarded and redefined as a privilege by some.
I think if marriage is “between one man and one woman” then after that first one either you can’t get married again, or the paperwork shouldn’t read “Marriage License” but rather “Remarriage License No. 1″ (or 2, 3, or whatever). If this one little honesty in language were used the “sanctity” of religious-based marriage would fade pretty quickly.
I hate to be the party pooper here, but this is why RSG and I are internet BFF — we say what’s on our minds. Oh and the fact that sometimes you meet people who you just sort of click with — that’s why we’re real life friends. Anyhoooo…I don’t believe in marriage. At all. In fact, if you’re to look at the history of marriage, it’s sort of a sick institution meant as an exchange of money and power among families who have money and power. Not to mention that women were (like slaves) the symbol of this exchange. Marrying for love is a recent endeavor and, as you see by the divorce statistics, this concept hasn’t worked out so well. So, I think marriage has always been a privilege. First for powerful families, and now as a way for straight people to torture themselves and to ensure their place in heaven.
I think everyone ought to be able to get married if they want to, however, I can’t believe it’s either a right or a privilege. I think it’s a little sick that we think it’s a right to exchange power and money on the backs of women, or that humans ought to be fulfilled by one single person for their whole lives — as if we don’t change or have needs beyond this person’s life. And I’m not really about privileges. Part of living in this world is realizing anything at all can be yours if you work hard, treat people well and have love in your heart.
I hope its not to late to comment.In my case its both Its a right to be able to marry but its a privilege to be married to the love of my life and to share children with him.
Interesting topic. Obviously, people have always “hooked up”, but as Melissa said, when women began to be looked at as PROPERTY, then marriage became a combination of political alliance and slavery (for the women). Personally, I think that if 2 (or more, but that’s a WHOLE other argument) people choose to live together and combine their lives, their finances, their possessions, and/or their genetics, then they’re married. I know I have argued here regarding constitutionality, etc., and I do firmly believe that, but for me, PERSONALLY, I neither need nor want “marriage” as it is defined today in our society. My partner and I have each been “married” twice before to men, and got none of the supposed “benefits” of said relationship. Between us, we’ve been beaten, verbally abused, cheated, forced to have children we didn’t want, gotten in trouble with the IRS, lost jobs, money, and living quarters, etc. etc. All by our perfectly “legal” spouses. Why on EARTH would be want to “buy into” that again?
Love is love, and you re-negotiate every day. Marriage is a fictional construct.
IMHO.
GG
I believe:
a Right is available for all…
and a Privilege is for a select set (which may be determined by all sorts of methods - such as passing a test for the privilege to drive)
I believe marriage is a Right
and the government believes marriage is a Privilege - so I think they should offer a test.
If there were a test. I would pass.
Donna in Atl sums it up well!
I would like to add that I think its confusing to have one word for two things… marriage is a religious ceremony and marriage is the legal rights gained when two people join resources.
I don’t care what the government decides to call marriage (civil union, dom. partnership…whatever) as long as they call it the same things for the hets and the homos both…. equal, equal, equal!
Religion can keep the term ‘marriage’, I think they want it more.
And I agree with Weese on the testing. I can tell there are a lot of grade A readers on this blog!
I believe legally it is a right, it establishes many legal rights for couples such as filing joint taxes, survivor benefit, etc. I do not believe in civil unions for same sex couple and marriage for opposite sex couples, I believe in marriage equality, not separate but equal.
I think religious organization should be able discriminate in who they will marry but not federal or state governments, they should have to marry any two people who want to marry, the exception being close family members. If they are married by religious organization they will also need to have a civil wedding, which could be done at the same time by a religious official.
I also think it should be called either civil marriages or civil unions for everyone
I gotta go with privilege.
For us, wouldn’t they say we’re trying to get a “Special right?”
I agree with Diana, we need full Marriage Equality, not “Gay Marriage” because there is no such thing as “Straight Marriage.” If you go anywhere in the world people know what the word marriage means, so we should not change the word. Just make the laws catch up with what heaps of gay couples around the world are already doing in their hearts - living married lives.
Civil Unions are not the way to go. They are not equal. In places like Connecticut where they have had civil unions for a while, most people still don’t know what it means, what should be done, and gay couples who have civil unions have to explain themselves to anyone and everyone all the time. I’m guessing it’s the same way in England and Ireland where they also have civil unions. If you’re married, everyone knows what it means and you don’t have to explain anything.
They are still trying to keep us at second class citizen status with civil unions and domestic partnerships. Not that I’m not happy with progress…but I’m ultimately holding out for marriage equality.
One of my professors would say “don’t get to hung up on the terms”. I don’t know why he says that when he then teaches the following…..
Liberty and the examination of the origins of liberty might be a good place to start. Typically we think of liberty in two categories.
1) Negative liberty. Negative liberty can be thought of as the freedom from X. Typically thought of as freedom from government.
2) Positive liberty. Positive liberty would be the freedom to do X.
Liberty is best looked at, or so I think, when we compare between ancient and modern liberty.
A look at Lockian theories on the “rights” might also be a good place to look.
Good luck!
Jeff
Similar to what weese said, Marriage should be a right, although unfortunately at the moment it’s a privilege.
I’d have to say privilege for some of the same reasons listed above for the argument for right- hmmm…
Marriage is for a select set- children can’t marry, first cousins can’t marry, you can’t marry your dog, or your mother. There are justifiable reasons for this.
Then there is the whole taxes thing. Taxes are set up to benefit folks who are married- a privilege- that’s not a right. Someone created that rule.
Two consenting adults, not related.
Add A Comment