The social conservative in me has trouble with the idea of gay marriage, and the Anglican in me has not been particularly impressed either by American gay bishop Gene Robinson or by Bishop Michael Ingham of New Westminster BC, who has decided to approve the blessing of gay marriages in his diocese. Certainly not sufficiently impressed to be willing to risk having the Canadian church effectively cease to be a member of the worldwide Anglican communion as a result of the stances those two gentlemen have taken. Not that I'm that impressed with the intolerance of some African Anglican bishops on the same sex issue, either. . . . .
The libertarian in me could support having the government get out of the "marriage" business altogether, with the concept of "marriage" to be replaced, for legal purposes, by a concept of civil union, which would primarily be an economic relationship, covering such things as rights of inheritance and survivorship, and assignment of entitlements under pension and health plans. Marriage would then be the province of religious bodies and would have no legal meaning, referring instead to a service in which the blessing of the creator, however envisioned, would be invoked for a couple entering into a union. The nature of the couples eligible for such blessing - homosexual or heterosexual - would be a matter for the members of individual faiths to decide, and the government (including human rights tribunals) would have no say in the matter.
Monday, July 25, 2005