
And tney don't. Even marraige in a non-religi
ous sense needs re-definit
ion into a expanded and secular, legal "contract" that gives protection
, and responsibi
lities to the parties. After all, if society grants bnefits through it's recognitio
n of unions, or Contracts, or Agreements of ANY type, whether spousal, inheritanc
e, or civil, then that same society has the obligation to trranspare
ntly set the "rules" for allowing the benefits. I'm NOT saying that government
al interferen
ce is helpful, but if we as Citizens want a secular, not religious, society, we have to also be prepared to set up and enforce the rules that govern our mutual responsibi
lities to each other. They're called "laws" for a reason, and however much we despise them, some are necessary because we can't depend on the "goodwill or good intentions
" of the majority, when there is always a minority seeking advantage through "gaming" the system, any system; it's human nature, unfortunat
ely.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
No comments:
Post a Comment