All the current hype today on the Internet, in the media, is about the Supreme Court making its decision about marriage equality, ad nauseum it seems to me, just like all other media coverage of ‘big’ events. Well, over the years I have developed my own ideas about marriage – between a man and woman as well as between two persons of the same gender.
First, I’ve been divorced 21 years as of April 1 (yes, it’s NOT a joke – the document did have a raised seal on it!) When I told my husband that I didn’t want to be married any longer, I guess that’s what I meant because I haven’t married again. There are some definitions that I have come across regarding what marriage is, and with which I agree.
In his book Seat of the Soul (published in 1989) Gary Zukav wrote that, “the archetype of marriage is no longer functional. It is being replaced with a new archetype that is designed to assist spiritual growth”. He reminds the reader that our words are powerful in creating what we intend, and he relates that when we speak of marriage we are speaking of the relationship between a ‘husband’ and a ‘wife’. He writes, “ ‘Husband’ means the master of a house, the head of a household, a manager. ‘Wife’ means a woman who is joined to a man in marriage, a hostess of a household. Sometimes it means a woman of humble rank. The relationship between a husband and wife is not equal. (emphasis added) When two people ‘marry,’ and think and speak of themselves as ‘husband’ and ‘wife,’ they enter into these consciousnesses and intelligences. The archetype of marriage was designed to assist physical survival.“
Now, in terms of “marriage equality”, what are the seekers intending – what are they looking for? They are looking for equality with those who can legally marry – husband and wife – male and female. They think that being able to marry, as two persons of the same gender, that that is what they are getting. But they are not, except in terms of potential legalized financial survival. They want to have their loving relationship validated according to a system that is antiquated, and that seems to be the only path available to them in terms of our culture.
Marriage has been set up for the ‘normal’ folks, according to religious tradition and belief. It needs to be changed. I say, let those who want to be ‘married’ do so within the context of their religion, in a church or synagogue or mosque, and that includes those same sex partners who want to live within that context, and understanding of the term ‘marriage’. However, most states require a license or civil document of some kind in order to get “married’. Here, I say let ALL unions between partners, or mates, or whatever you want to call them, be civil unions, with everyone having the same legal rights in terms of insurance benefits, inheritance/survivorship, etc. – all the things that the ‘normal’ partners have enjoyed.
In our culture we look at marriage as a human ‘right’, but it’s really the partnering between equals that should be the ‘right’. If the states would legalize ‘partnering’ between any two people who want that relationship, and let ‘marriage’ rest with the religious, I think it would be more in keeping with equal human rights. And it might promote the shift to a more evolved culture. As for spiritual growth I’m not commenting. It would seem to be more a humanistic view, however.