I'm not opposed, but I take those two as separate things, the Roman Catholic marriage and a secular marriage, or even one performed in a church that doesn't recognize marriage as a sacrement are not really the same thing. So I think that's where I personally sit, I'll call it a marriage, but it's a secular marriage that's different from a religious one. For other people who cannot or will not separate them, it's not the same way, they see you saying something about the institution that Christ started, you see a tax code and visitation. It's not so much about denying you anything, it's about what the sacrement is to them, and if marriages everywhere are sacremental, then it's not possible to have an extrabiblical marriage because Jesus defines marriage.
Like I said, I draw a line around those in my denomination, and anything that they do would affect the definition of marriage, but because we aren't living under canon law, there's a bit of separation there. those marriages are different, as they're secular and governed by secular law (and the laws of your church/temple/mosque/asram/amileavinganythingout) I don't get a vote on what a Muslim marriage is, or a buddhist one, or a hindu one, or a jedi one. That's what a secular government does. We don't live under ISIL or in Vatican City, we aren't under religious law, and thus what matters is lack of harm, consent, and legal consistency. Once you show all of that, it's a free choice in a free country.
I'm not opposed, but I take those two as separate things, the Roman Catholic marriage and a secular marriage, or even one performed in a church that doesn't recognize marriage as a sacrement are not really the same thing. So I think that's where I personally sit, I'll call it a marriage, but it's a secular marriage that's different from a religious one. For other people who cannot or will not separate them, it's not the same way, they see you saying something about the institution that Christ started, you see a tax code and visitation. It's not so much about denying you anything, it's about what the sacrement is to them, and if marriages everywhere are sacremental, then it's not possible to have an extrabiblical marriage because Jesus defines marriage.
Like I said, I draw a line around those in my denomination, and anything that they do would affect the definition of marriage, but because we aren't living under canon law, there's a bit of separation there. those marriages are different, as they're secular and governed by secular law (and the laws of your church/temple/mosque/asram/amileavinganythingout) I don't get a vote on what a Muslim marriage is, or a buddhist one, or a hindu one, or a jedi one. That's what a secular government does. We don't live under ISIL or in Vatican City, we aren't under religious law, and thus what matters is lack of harm, consent, and legal consistency. Once you show all of that, it's a free choice in a free country.