[mvpel]

I have a far better solution - the the government OUT of the marriage business entirely.

Of course that would mean having to scrap all the carrot & stick social engineering that's imposed through the tax codes, but hey, life is not without sacrifices, right?

[GovernmentShrinker]

Yep. It's amazing to me how many people who say they want limited government and no government-sponsored social engineering, insist that the government needs to be involved in defining, registering, and approving citizens' family arrangements. To hear these people tell it, you'd think the only reason that good stable heterosexual marriages continue to exist is because they've got the official approval stamp and license from the government. Somehow I doubt that . . .

[marktwain]

I have a far better solution - the the government OUT of the marriage business entirely.

Bingo. It is when the churches gave up their responsibility to determine marraige that started this process. Let the Church define who is married and who is not. Get the state out of it.

For things like child support and property issues, honor the right to contract, and have an enforecable, written contract that both parties understand, instead of the unwritten, uncertain "marraige contract" where people learn that they have undertaken obligations and given up rights that they had no knowledge of. The obligations and rights even vary from state to state when you move, so you are not even held to the contractual facts of when and where you married!