Reversing it only means to take it out of the religious context of marriage. It would therefore continue to allow legal unions.
As far as the government is concerned it’s a tax issue. The Gov’t wants a cut of the action. Which guarantees a resolution for these unions to continue.
Personally I’m against marriage as an institution because it has gone from holy matrimony to a legal union, or civil union with governmental underpinnings tied directly to the IRS.
Do people wishing to avoid the tax ramifications but and still enter into a union? Certainly they do it’s called holy matrimony and they don’t need a preacher with a state license to conduct a ceremony or a civilian to conduct a ceremony for 50 bucks a shot.
The downside is the divorce rate because if you’re legally married the legal entitlement through divorce would be strictly adhered to, where if you just went and got your holy man to perform the ceremony for you it would be more of a mutual agreement. Even a whisper of getting an attorney involved with legal prenuptial agreements is probably impossible and would also be a tip-off to the IRS.
Plain and simple - it’s all about the Franklin’s.
Marriage licenses go way back and there are situations such as the military where being legally recognized as married matters.
“The Gov’t wants a cut of the action.”
If .gov legalized marriage to cats and dogs they could rake in the cash...