Gay Marriage

What a topic to start on, eh? It's not a tech-related topic, but that's good - I don't want to set all of you up for that. My opinion on this topic will, however, draw on my Libertarian leanings. My biggest reason for starting with this is that my opinion is one that I rarely hear put forth. It's radical, but it just might work.

But let's start at the beginning. With any discussion of this type, the best way to start is to treat it like a mediation. What is the major sticking point for both sides? On the pro-gay marriage side of the fence, the biggest issue is that of rights and privileges. This is definitely a valid issue. There are many gay couples who cannot get insurance for their partner, whose partner cannot adopt the child they raise together, not to mention if they break up. Visitation is nearly impossible (except in Minnesota).

However, the anti-gay marriage side's primary argument is just as valid. This side is worried about the erosion of the meaning and concept of marriage. Marriage originated in, and it could be argued belongs to, religion. The very concept of gay marriage flies in the face of the religious underpinnings of the institution.

So how do we solve this seemingly uncrossable breach? How do we get COMPLETELY equal rights for gay couples without eroding the religious definitions of marriage? Some states have come close. The answer lies in civil unions. However, not one state has gotten it right. The answer lies in one of the founding principles of this country: The Separation of Church and State. The solution is to take marriage ENTIRELY out of the hands of the State. Marriage is a religious institution and the State has no place in it. The solution is to issue civil unions, and ONLY civil unions, to everyone. A crucial part of this is to retroactively convert all existing marriages to civil unions.

Warning: Here comes a curve ball. As a Libertarian, I am a staunch supporter of states' rights, a limited Federal Government, and major restrictions on the currently out-of-control commerce clause. However, if there's ever been a case for the Federal Government to step in, this is it. There are so many interstate and Federal benefits tied to marriage: taxes and health care are but two. The Federal Government needs to define civil unions, what they mean and how you get them, and ban states from endorsing the religious institution of marriage. And if people want to be married, they can do exactly what they were originally intended to do - they go to their favorite religious body.