Michael2502 Wrote:
Dec 13, 2012 9:32 PM
The problem with keeping the state out of marriage is that this only trivializes marriage further. Any couple with a "civil union license" would simply call themselves married, even though marriage as traditionally understood has always, even in cultures where homosexuality was accepted, been understood to be the union of a man and a woman, since that's the kind of relationship that (1) reflects the sexual duality of and represents in a microcosm the whole human race, and (2) is the only kind that naturally creates new human beings. The term "marriage" would become nothing more than a distinction without a difference -- i.e, it would be redefined anyway, by virtue of its having no official definition.