tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post4814334184719381996..comments2024-03-28T08:57:53.180+00:00Comments on Darwinian Conservatism by Larry Arnhart: Government Marriage and Civil MarriageLarry Arnharthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14619785331100785170noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-50078132882899802942014-11-20T16:57:29.637+00:002014-11-20T16:57:29.637+00:00What about Nominalism in Law? Shouldn’t naturalism...What about Nominalism in Law? Shouldn’t naturalism represent how we view the laws of nature? In all seriousness, the logic that follows is akin to that of referring to the phenomenon of ‘gravity’ as ‘ether’? It is less specific, more folkish, and not realistic by current standards. Is humanity so depraved that we have to abuse language to get some people up to date on how other human beings should be treated ethically?Mobius Triphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11620423740245738406noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-29844662641269545012014-11-19T18:28:52.134+00:002014-11-19T18:28:52.134+00:00But can you separate marriage from the law?
All t...But can you separate marriage from the law?<br /><br />All type of legal matters, including next-of-kin, property, taxes, inheritance, children, legal testimony, etc., would be affected. What of the religiously, but not legally married couples. States still need definitions of common-law marriage if the fundamental relationship of husband/wife is to be recognized as prior to relationships such as brother/sister in legal matters.<br /><br />Doesn’t legal marriage exist because marriage exists prior to the positive law? Can the positive law cannot ignore such a basic and natural arrangement without distorting it? <br /><br />See e.g. http://www.wbonds.blogspot.com/2013/11/on-tying-and-cutting-knots.htmlW. Bondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11876061563314623223noreply@blogger.com