[StonyBurk]

Problem with this article is the author ignores the fact
that in the United States -marriage licences were not
granted ,nor marriage recorded except by the church as a
religious duty. And this fact remained undiluted until
about 1853 --It was not until 1987 that a court divided
amongst itself declared the civil institution had value to a State system that had walled God out.But that same body
when it was true to the language and intent of the Constitution declared in 1858 that "the basis of the family consisting of and springing from the union for life
of one man an done woman in the Holy estate of matrimony."
Oh what atangled web we weave when we tolerate courts that
erect walls to decieve.

[AnalogReigns]

Dang it! Like the author, I too am a traditionalist, and unlike him I'm one who will fight gay marriage. His point is that marriage for the last 30 years has become something that it's never been in Christian history, devalued and degenerate, by our society as a whole.

Historically, the Protestant first settlers (the Pilgrims and Puritans) of America, regarded marriage as ONLY as a civil institution (not even allowing weddings in churches...) --the logic well described in the first paragraphs of the article above.

The idea that marriage was just a religious thing, and the state moved in in just the last 100 years is just bogus. State regulation has greatly increased with marriage (as in everything) but marriage in American history...clear on back to colonial days, was more than simply a religious (and legally unenforceable) agreement. It's a universal, not only religious, institution.

Marriage was recognized by the state--and no matter what your religion was or wasn't, the state (provided it wasn't polygammy) regarded it as legitimate. Since divorce was pretty rare, the only time the courts would generally get involved would be over inheritance issues, hence formal licensing, massive family courts, divorce lawyers, etc. weren't seen as needed.