Saying "I Won't" to "I Do."

It is fair to say that the issue of marriage is one of the major struggles in American culture. The debate on who can marry and why has dominated the news in the last few years. Now, in an interesting development, it may be that people at each end of the spectrum are embracing somewhat similar tactics as the debate continues to roil.

From the more liberal side of things, two UCC clergy began the Refuse To Sign movement, calling on clergy, congregations, and engaged couples to refuse to have a religious person sign the marriage license. Their point is that the state should extend marriage certificates to all people and that clergy and/or churches should decide whether or not to bless same-sex marriages. They believe that clergy become de facto agents for the state when a minister signs a certificate; thus, the clergy person is supporting the state's position on marriage. Supporters of this movement exhort couples to have marriage certificates signed by the court clerk or by a judge only until justice is done.

From the more conservative side of things, some conservative clergy and their parishoners are pushing the position that the state should have nothing to do with marriage at all. They feel marriage is a "holy estate," to quote a phrase, and the state should stay out of the process. These folks are motivated by a concern that the state may legalized a marriage relationship which they feel is unbiblical, immoral, and unscriptural.

So, both sides are trying to redefine the marriage process to achieve what they feel is the "right" thing to do.

How do you feel about all of this?