, ,

Mairrage in its traditional sense has been destroyed long before homosexual couples decided to join in on the benefits offered by the state. The traditional marriage was when a man and a woman made a sacred, life long vow to each other for life. This act ensures better than any social contrivance of man to create, sustain and nurture children in a natural network of moms and dads, aunts uncles and cousins, grandmothers and grand fathers. Heterosexuals, post “sexual revolution” turned this selfish act into an all too temporary state of selfish abuse, divorce, infidelity, broken homes and fractured families. These conditions always existed, but were more rare and frowned upon by society. Now it is sadly accepted and tolerated as a condition of the human condition.
My point is this. Since we have taken the nuclear family out of the marriage equation, we should either end all state sanctioning of relationships or extend it to everybody who cohabits for an extended period of time whether they are romantically involved or just platonic friends. To stop anywhere in between is discrimination.
I favor the State getting out of the marriage business altogether. If a relationship is formed for mutual benefit, why should the State be involved ? The benefit of that relationship is the only incentive needed. If you want to call that relationship “marriage” or a pink unicorn, that is your first amendment right to do so. In any case, those who still view marriage as the life long loving selfless commitment between a man and a woman can and should continue to do so.
I do warn society however of the utter damage done by any other relationship that intentionally leaves children bereft of either a loving mother or father.

Children raised outside of a nuclear family face the loss of tradition, stability, faith, natural support system and so much more that is present in “traditional marriage” To be tossed around between two or more value systems, often in conflict is not good for any child.