+27 Marriage shouldn't be involved with the government and legal matters. It has nothing to do with protecting citizens from danger and some laws keep people from pursuing happiness, amirite?

by Anonymous 9 years ago

It is the only way to protect your joint assets from government seizure. Two peole fall in love and move in to a house together and the homeowner dies. The lover has no legal claim to the home absent a marriage license.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

There should be a way to get those rights without marriage.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Agreed! Suggestions? Perhaps a legal contract of union? I am open to ideas but they all sound like another name for marriage to me.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Yeah, I can see how that would work... Well there still shouldn't be marriage laws PREVENTING one from pursuing happiness in marriage.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

totally

by Anonymous 10 years ago

I disagree solely because (speaking about the USA here) if left up to the general public MORE individuals would be discriminated against. The government, in many cases, is the only thing forcing businesses to serve blacks, gays, women etc in places of establishment and if we got rid of the federal government I don't have enough fingers to list how many states would say "fuck you" to the homosexual community.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Marriage is a contract and enforcing contracts is one of the main functions of government. Contracts are essential to living in a civilized society, so you are really barking up the wrong tree with this question.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Marriage IS a legal matter, as far as society goes. Whatever form it comes in, it is a legal union that binds more than just two people. The very cornerstone of the marriage equality debate is that, primarily, marriage is about LEGAL status of couples.

by Anonymous 9 years ago