I’ve been thinking this is a good idea for a long time apart from the gay issue. What business does the government have sanctioning a marriage? That is a private affair between two people and (if applicable) a church.
antiRepublicrat: “What business does the government have sanctioning a marriage?”
I can answer that. Government has an interest in encouraging activities that build up society. You may not agree, but marriage is an institution that is very, very beneficial to society at large. If more people would marry and stay married, there would be much less demand for government provided social services, like welfare.
I’ve been thinking of this as a possible solution, too. But I’d only be willing to sign on to the idea if there was no implication that the two people were sexually involved with each other.
This could help solve some other real issues that families face. If any two (or more) people could form a domestic partnership, then this could be beneficial to families that take care of an older relative, or two older brothers or friends who live together. Why can’t a middle aged son and his wife form a domestic partnership with his mother, thereby enabling him to put her on his health insurance?
The libs have been clamoring for years to “get the government out of my bedroom.” Well, let’s do that. Why should only gay couples be able to form “domestic partnerships?” Why does my employer have to know whether or not I’m having sex with the person I live with? It’s none of their business.
I’m not completely convinced of what I’m writing, but I’ve been thinking about it.
I think we should consider a little “legal jujitsu” here. It’s not a completely crazy idea.
The government is the final say in how society operates. Check out the happiness quotient of Somalians for a lesson on the success of anarchy.