[Antoninus]

I'm not in favor of same-sex marriage; I'm against government marriage, period.

Your liberaltarian ideas are too benighted for words. Western societies are built upon the institution of the traditional marriage and family. If you weaken or destroy that key institution, the society will collapse eventually and become just like every other failed society the world has produced.

Liberaltarians are either too dumb or too naive to understand that the left has been purposely trying to undermine the traditional family for decades, both in the US and Europe. In Europe, they've largely succeeded. The result is going to be Eurabia in a few decades.

If you want that to happen here, please continue on your current path of profound ignorance.

[MinnesotaLibertarian]

Western societies also used to have an official state church, so the church's definition of marriage prevailed. This is a religiously free society, so it can't work the same way. If some liberal Protestant church want to marry gay people, we can't stop them, even if it's not recognized by government.

Also, if we're talking about moral decay, I submit that divorce and feminism have had a much larger negative effect that homosexuality ever will. However, I still feel that family and religious issues are best handled just there; within the family and the church. Not by government, government-run schools, etc.

[Publius Valerius]

Minnesota Libertarian: I'm against government marriage, period.

Antoninus: Your liberaltarian ideas are too benighted for words. Western societies are built upon the institution of the traditional marriage and family.

How does that respond to his comment? For instance, in my state, there were still people who were not required to get a marriage license as late as 1940. My state recognized common law marriages into the 1960s, and I think that there are still some states that do.

I know it's remarkable, but my state managed to hold western civilization intact for a long time without requiring marriage licenses.