[Redcloak]

“We have now laid the framework for rewriting marriage statutes across the country,”

So why is government involved in sanctioning marriage, straight, gay, polymorphic, or whatever, in the first place? Marriage, I'm sure most here will agree, is a religious institution. Why is the State involved in what is, at heart, a religious matter?

The only interest the State should have in marriage is its relationship to simply contract law. When two people marry, they enter into a contract. The State should only be involved if one party violates the contract or if they're legally incompetent to enter into the contract. The gender, or number, of persons involved shouldn't be a State concern.

(Of course, the real reason the State wants to be involved in this particular religious institution is to license and tax it!)

[hoosier_scientist]

>>So why is government involved in sanctioning marriage, straight, gay, polymorphic, or whatever, in the first place? Marriage, I'm sure most here will agree, is a religious institution. Why is the State involved in what is, at heart, a religious matter? <<

This is exactly the question that we will soon have a national discussion over -- the value and reason for marriage. I strongly disagree that marriage is only a religious matter. The marriage and family are the very cornerstones of our society and society has a very large stake in supporting marriages. Husband - wife two parent families have been consistently shown to have the best results in raising children including the amount of crime, education, values, etc. that a civilized society is based on.

This is what the gay marriage debate boils down to: why do we have marriage in the first place? Then, in that context, why or why not should gays be allowed, then, to marry?