Thanks Rob,

I'm wondering if the best way to respond is to support this or if we
should use the issue to lobby government to get out of the marriage
business all together.



I'm with Mike on this one. Instead of legislating rights to married
couples, get government out of the marriage business and remove it's
ability to define a 'legal marriage'.
Let's not forget, it's a clear separation of Church and State issue also.
Having the government recognize one Church's (or atheists) recognized
marriage but not another's puts it in the position of arbiter of religious
authority. Isn't this the kind of decision our Founding Fathers wanted
government kept out of?
-Kevin O'Neal-


  Yes, very good points. The question currently before us is Recognize Some Marriages vs. Recognize All Marriages. We might wish there was a law or an initiative representing the Recognize No Marriages alternative, but there isn't. There are two public policy choices on the table.

  Now either official recognition of all marriages or official recognition of none could be interpreted as government staying out of the issue of marriage. But to recognize some marriages but not others is undeniably the option that would require the most active role from government as an "arbiter of religious authority." It is the least libertarian of the three options, and the least compatible with separation of church and state.

Yours in liberty,
              <<< Starchild >>>