Comment: Sorry...

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Actually, they should ... (see in situ)

Sorry...

I should have said real libertarians don't give a damn about who marries whom. (Was in too much of a hurry earlier... and I am too accustomed to the divisive neocon right wing v. liberal tug-o-war on the issue.)

But, yes, to your point: the fact that it has become an issue of government is indicative of a larger problem, and I agree that this situation can only serve to thwart liberty.

Legal marriage is in essence commerce in the eyes of the state. (Heck, no surprise here, as it used to blatantly be commerce between families in our past.) Case in point: two people may as individuals each take advantage of tax-exempt status per homesteading properties in AZ, for example; however, as soon as they are married--POOF... now, as a economic "unit" they may only exempt one property. Why? I think the fact that tax status changes upon becoming legally married says it all. And our society pushes the institution on people relentlessly.

I think people should be allowed to marry whomever they want. Period. I support that, even though I'm semi-cynical on the institution itself, I admit. (And certainly it is arrogant and foolhardy of the anti-same sex marriage crowd to insist that they are the only true custodians of the institution... some great job they've done thus far: 50% of hetero marriages ending in failure these days?! Gimme a break!)

I've been in a happy hetero relationship for 14+ years. We're proud to remain legally unmarried, as we are and have been married in our hearts and minds for the duration (And we'll stay this way no doubt longer than at least half of our "married" friends!). No kids and no church here, brother. Some good estate planning and living wills and we're as set as we'll need to be. Whose effing business is it anyway but our own? In medieval times marriage was often a promise between two people--end of story. Why is it blown into such a big deal by our society... especially when most people who enter into it lack the maturity as individuals to even do it justice? It is all too often a joke and a scam.

And check this out: my woman was for a time employed in management by a national chain restaurant. Non-employee partners in same sex unmarried relationships with employees WERE covered under medical benefits, whereas hetero unmarried employees' partners WERE NOT! How effed is that? Bob Evans. Seems like the newest of the new groups to be officially discriminated against is unmarried hetero couples! I never woulda thunk it, but it's true! And what is this exclusion / punishment of sorts meant to say? How does this figure?

Stay unmarried, I say, and stick it to the man!

What would the Founders do?