On many occasions in the past, I’ve questioned the idea of states being in the marriage business. I’d prefer that states became simple registrars of civil unions, and that the term “marriage” be left to be defined by society…or that religious marriage, as a sacrament, be left in the hands of churches. (After all, if it doesn’t make sense for the government to define eligibility for baptism, why does it make sense for the government to say whom God may join together?)
As this OpEd piece in the New York Times indicates, I’m perhaps not alone in having this view:
Possession of a marriage license is no longer the chief determinant of which obligations a couple must keep, either to their children or to each other. But it still determines which obligations a couple can keep — who gets hospital visitation rights, family leave, health care and survivor’s benefits. This may serve the purpose of some moralists. But it doesn’t serve the public interest of helping individuals meet their care-giving commitments.
Perhaps it’s time to revert to a much older marital tradition. Let churches decide which marriages they deem “licit.” But let couples — gay or straight — decide if they want the legal protections and obligations of a committed relationship.