Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Tanner Lovelace <lovelace AT wayfarer.org>]

childers.paula AT epamail.epa.gov wrote:

> Diana, you have hit upon one of the biggest stumbling blocks, in my
> opinion, in the "marriage debate": the separation of church and state.
> "Marriage" is both a social and a religious institution. However,
> society has done a bang-up job of co-mingling the two to the point that
> they become difficult to discuss separately.

As an interesting contrast, when I lived in Spain, I found out
(at least at the time), that marriages there are not co-mingled.
I saw some friends who would get "married" as far as the state
was concerned and then a month or so later get married in the
church (or was it vice-versa?  it's been almost 15 years, so it's
hard to remember).  Anyway, there was an interesting question
as to what to do with the time in-between?  For the people
that believe they aren't really married until the "church"
(whatever church it might be) "blesses" the union, what do they
do when the state now says they *are* married.  (or vice-versa).
What is the best way to combine (or separate) these two things?

Cheers,
Tanner