Again, action without responsibility perpetrated by liberals. Your veering from my point that state-sanctioned marriage would be unnecessary if people were held responsible for their actions.
HELD RESPONSIBLE BY WHO ? We live in a modern world of mobile wealth and mobile people. We no longer live in a world where people spend all their lives in one place and reputations are etched in concrete. And it is only in such a world that libertarianism could ever work because the fewer fixed cultural norms enforced by ostracism and disgrace you have, the more government you need. Fear of punishment has always been a basis of human virtue, not airy talk of "personal responsibility". When society can no longer punish with fear of ostracism, disgrace, and ruin because the cultural moral consensus has collapsed, it must use state coercion.
True. But the issue is that society is no longer able to ostracize or socially (not physically) punish those who do what the majority feels is wrong. States rights are non-existent (after the Supreme Court overturned the sodomy law). All excesses are praised and permitted by liberals...they don't allow anyone else in society to object to the majority of the issue.
Your solution is to create a law that limits the freedom of individuals without doing anything to reverse the trend of perversion allowed and encouraged by liberals as "normal". My point is that 2 wrongs don't make a right.
Your disdain of Libertarians is apparent. The problem is that we aren't that far apart. I believe the only way we can reverse the trend is by voting conservative so that conservative judges are appointed to U.S. Circuit Courts and the Supreme Court and reverse this lunacy called liberalism. However, a true constructionist would not allow the powers of the federal government to infringe on the rights of individuals.