This is not what I ever understood about libertarian views on marriage. The only thing I ever heard is that government has no business in the marriage business. There is no actual mandate for government certifying marriage. Gay marriage should never have been “legalized” because no marriage should have been legalized. Marriage started as a religious institution. That should never have been appropriated by the secular sphere.
Yes, there is.
In 1924, the Simpson Act closed the floodgates of immigration, and they remained closed until 1965 when Hubert Humphrey and Ted Kennedy reopened them. There were a number of bills packaged with the Simpson Act, and one of them laid an unfunded mandate on the states to maintain birth, death and marriage certificates.
Here is where it gets strange. The entity that pushed heavily for this law was not exactly a federal agency. It was the Federal Reserve. As to why the Fed thought this was important is something I can't consider without donning my tinfoil hat.
“Legalization” of marriage results from legal history. The term “license” seems like a misnomer to me and I don’t know why they ever called it that.
US law is not solely based on the constitution. Civilly it is largely based on English common law. This ties into the constitution in regards to property rights.
So what happens to “your” property when you die? If you think property belongs to the state you might support big inheritance taxes. If you think it belongs to the individual you think it belongs to their family.
So how does the state “know” who that family is? The only way is if marriages and births are recorded.
Hence I always thought it should be called a marriage recording fee as opposed to license.
It could be that the original intent of “license” was a deliberate way of excluding what the entire history of civilization knew - that it was between men and women, even in the polygamous societies, and did not include same sex.