In Europe, prior to the twelfth century, marriage was purely a social thing. Neither state nor religious sanctioning was available.

From the twelfth to the sixteenth century, marriage was the purview of the religious authorities. The state had nothing to do with the institution.

Even after Martin Luther telling the princes that they should be the ones under whose purview marriage forms, states were reluctant to get involved in it.

It was only after WW1, that governments used "protection of children" as a rational for controlling marriage. Traditionally, the state has only wanted children for use as canon fodder.

Historically, it has been the church that looked after the welfare of children, not the state. More precisely, it has been churches that are not part of the government apparatus, that has been concerned about the protection of children.

As far as the United States goes, the state took control of marriage as a direct result of Jim Crow laws, and the enforced segregation enforced by the North, upon the South.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

• Justice Scalia: Why is govmnt involved in religious institution of marriage in first place? - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, June 25 2013 @ 02:46 PM EDT
  • Justice Scalia: Why is govmnt involved in religious institution of marriage in first place? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 26 2013 @ 10:08 AM EDT

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

• Relatively recently that MEN left the farm en masse.... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 26 2013 @ 10:46 AM EDT