It appears that this old chestnut
of a dispute just goes on and on. After having recently finished watching the
first three series of the Tudor’s – which for anyone who hasn’t seen it is all
about Henry VIII (yes- the King that had six wives), I can’t help but notice
that we don’t seem to have come very far. Especially when you consider that
this question of the ownership of marriage between the Church and State seems
certain to have been rekindled by the comments made by the Equalities Minister
– Lynne Featherstone, that have been reported today.
Her take, according to her
comments is that; “marriage is owned by neither the state nor the church.” This
seems in my humble opinion, a perfectly valid if not slightly confusing thing
to say. Valid because if I want to get married I don’t feel I need the
permission of my local MP, the Prime Minister, or the Archbishop of Canterbury.
That said I know that in typing this I’m both missing the point and trivialising
the issue – it was intentionally done!
Slightly confusing though,
because if marriage is owned by no one. Then what’s the point of it, and what
would be the validity of it? Surely if no one owned marriage then it would lose
all of its meaning, definition, and sanctity?
Personally I am not a proponent
of marriage one way or another. It’s not my cup of tea, and I don’t really see
the point. I understand that legally you are better protected financially if
you are married, and I hear you’re privy to certain tax advantages! You also as
a woman get to wear a posh dress for the day and show off your happiness, and
ability to pull off a superb shindig, to all of your friends, frenemies, family
and extended family (if you have the cash) in the process.
Or you can go on the BBC Thee
program “Don’t Tell the Bride”! Then you can have a documentary made of the
“happiest day of your life” and get £10,000 to pay for the day. Yet regardless
of the reason you choose to get married, and aside from if it’s your heart’s
desire to ever get married or not, it must be nice to know that you can, which
leads me in a roundabout way back to the point that the comments made make reference
to the fact that currently not everyone in this country is entitled to marry.
Featherstone’s comments will probably
cause much debate, which one can only assume was her intention given that she
is the Equalities Minister and the issue of being able to legally wed
regardless of your sexual orientation is one that surely must fall firmly
within her remit. Yet I doubt a one line caption will solve the issue. After
all the Church and State have only been squabbling over marriage since the sixteenth
century, well in England at least.
Marriage and the arguments about
who should and shouldn’t be able to get married is an issue that will always
antagonise many people depending on their personal beliefs, and it will cause
many polarised views, and lead to heated debates and arguments. Marriage is
seen in many different lights, and traditionalist will of course (being traditionalists
and not modernists, or reformists) never want to see anything changed.
Regardless of your views or
beliefs, should we not all bear in mind that one in three marriages end in
divorce? This might not have been such a worry for Henry VIII’s wives though,
as for them there was a fate more terrifying than the cost of a good divorce
lawyer. Let us not forget, Henry VIII had six wives; divorced, beheaded, died,
divorced, beheaded, survived.
No comments:
Post a Comment