Muslim, Mormon, Hindu, CHRISTIAN, and all other relgions which practice marriage. Marriage being a religious institution is not nonsense. It’s nonsense that you believe calling marriage religious is nonsense.
Marriage CAN be religious to individuals, but marriage is a legal relationship as well, or even purely so to some Americans, and suddenly getting so deeply religious doesn’t make sense for a libertarian, but it does make sense for a libertarian seeking a way to push gay marriage and polygamy by trying to get conservatives to move off into dream land and fantasy, and cease fighting for marriage in the public arena and seeking social conservative candidates for office.
There is not going to be any sudden, effective, national political movement to end marriage in America as we know it, and you very well know that.
You keep ignoring post 13, are you going to ignore this as well?
From THE COLONIAL FAMILY IN AMERICA
“While we think of the early New England settlers as very religious, they actually viewed marriage as a civil contract, not a religious contract. Consequently, marriage was a function of the magistrates more than the clergy.”
From LEGISLATIVE GUIDE TO MARRIAGE LAW Iowa.gov
“They (Puritans founders of Massachusetts) believed that marriage was not a religious ceremony but a civil contract. They required that this covenant must be “agreed” or “executed” (not “performed” or “solemnized”) before a magistrate, and not a minister. They also insisted that if the terms of the marriage covenant were broken, then the union could be ended by divorce. These attitudes became the basis of regional marriage customs throughout New England.”