[Bokababe]

"I’ve been arguing for that very case for the last 3 years. Government has no business dictating what is or is not marriage. Marriage is a sacrament from G-d. Why we feel the need to put that holiness into the hands of the most unholy - politicians - I’ll never understand."

Me, too.

And ironically, what group is the current system (with government deciding what is a "marriage", rather than religious leaders deciding) protecting?

NOT the religious heterosexuals who'd likely get married in a church or synagogue anyway because they consider religious marriage to be sacred. But rather "government defined marriage" is already protecting the nonreligious who'd rather get married by a judge and claim that their secular marriage has the same validity as a religious ceremony.

In short, the walls of "the sanctity of (legal) marriage" have already been breached by non-religious heterosexuals. .

Yet whose leading the charge to protect the rights of the non-religious to call their heterosexual marriage, "sacred"? The Christian Right! It's absurd!

[gogogodzilla]

Humph. Never really thought about that aspect of it.

Though, why should it matter so much for the non-religious? Simply co-habitating for XX number of years gives one ‘common-law marriage’ rights in most places.