Without marriage contracts recognized by our government, it would make inheritances, who can visit you in the hospital and other such questions murky.
That said: it’s not a big issue. Voters can decide what constitutes a legally defined marriage.
Or they could, until these courts got involved.
Now we will have questions of polygamy, child brides, marriage to animals and inanimate objects and all kinds of other strange things.
Children give married couples tax breaks. Now I buy six mail order brides and have seven children with each and collect the refund checks on all.
The benefit of govt recognized marriage contracts is primarily to offset other demands made by the govt; e.g., deductions, gains, inheritance, etc. But I’m sure private institutions could adopt criteria that wouldn’t rely on govt definitions in order to keep the traditions we embrace intact.
The proposal of removing govt from marriage triggers the concern that bad things will happen despite the same bad things already happening by virtue of govt involvement in marriage.