No.
You have either misunderstood or misrepresented what I’ve said.
I CLEARLY said in my post that it would not include members of the same family, citing many legal precedents for this. And yes, classifying marriage between two and only two people will give headaches to the polygamy crowd. And I do not believe the law will permit it. Why? Because they cannot be given PREFERENTIAL treatment. Recognition of polygamy requires that, which is another violation of the equal protection clause. Can you imagine the lawsuits? To recognize polygamy, one must conclude that if each wife has been around for ten years, that EACH of them is entitled, under the law, to draw on the full SS benefits of the husband. Think about that for about 5 minutes.
That will never happen, or we will be broke faster than we are already gonna be broke.
I note that you have not commented on the couple I referenced in my post. Under which part of the Constitution or the Declaration will you stake your claim? Are they entitled to any legal protection of their household or not?
I’m not trying to be coy, but I am trying to make you understand that this is the question the courts will be expected to answer.
Ok, I will. This is what you wrote:
There were two ladies there, probably in their 60’s, age wise. I was told they were a “couple” who had been together since their mid-20’s.
They were very nice women. Friendly & engaging. They did nothing in public anyone would have to hide their children from seeing. Two grandmotherly types....
While I imagine they are both gone now, given their ages, there WILL be a case like this that finds its way into the judicial system. And the question will be simple:
“Why were these two people prevented from forming a legally recognized household, that would have afforded them the ability to have their household protected by the same laws that protect ALL households? Why would a surviving partner not be allowed to collect Social Security benefits, for example, after many decades of having a household?”
If we are going to give these rights and priviledges to two grandmotherly women who have lived together for 20 years, then what is the rationale for denying these rights and priviledges to EVERYONE who has shared a house for 20 years? Why would we deny this benefit to sisters who live together, or brothers who live together, or a Father and Daughter who live together or a mother and son?
It seems to me that the qualifier for your scenario is that as long as these people are not closely related and as long as they have engaged in sodomistic behavior for a period of time, then they should therefore qualify for all the benefits of marriage and be entitled to share in social security death benefits.
I'm hoping you simply have not thought through your position. However it sounds to me like you have given up the traditional marriage fight and have surrendered to the enemy.
Correct me if I am wrong.