It occurred to me recently that involving the government in marriage is a mistake to begin with. People should hold ceremonies and not bother with the paperwork. We can then repeal all laws that distinguish between married/unmarried and be done with it. I don't know why the government should have anything to do with defining marriage, per se.
karlo said: I don't know why the government should have anything to do with defining marriage, per se.
I'm not exactly sure what the history of marriage is and just when the state got involved (early I'm guessing in order to tax it).
Marriage is basically a legally binding contract between people. Does the state get involved in defining other kinds of contract or do we let the courts normally do that sort of thing?
3 comments:
Interesting.
It occurred to me recently that involving the government in marriage is a mistake to begin with. People should hold ceremonies and not bother with the paperwork. We can then repeal all laws that distinguish between married/unmarried and be done with it. I don't know why the government should have anything to do with defining marriage, per se.
karlo said: I don't know why the government should have anything to do with defining marriage, per se.
I'm not exactly sure what the history of marriage is and just when the state got involved (early I'm guessing in order to tax it).
Marriage is basically a legally binding contract between people. Does the state get involved in defining other kinds of contract or do we let the courts normally do that sort of thing?
Post a Comment