With legal battles in Hawaii, legislative initiatives from the right wing and the usual gay activists, the gay marriage issue is rapidly consuming us. Before the battle lines become any more rigid, are there options yet to be explored? Maybe nobody should get a marriage license!
The gay community could take a page from conservative rhetoric. Consider a couple of key terms from House Speaker Newt Gingrich: privatization and less government intrusion into the everyday lives of Americans.
Start with fundamental questions. Why should government regulate marriage? What does a government issued marriage license mean?
One assumes that to get a driver's license, one must demonstrate a certain degree of competence in driving. The same reasoning is true of cosmeticians', morticians', law, and medical licenses. Such is not the case with a marriage license.
One can hardly make a case for encouraging marriage to sustain the population. We won't run out of people. And with the teen birth rate, nobody has to encourage child bearing.
That leaves one argument that conservatives use; the institution helps stabilize families. In light of their attacks on lesbians and gays, it seems they should embrace same-sex unions.
Those who frequently bash lifestyles different from their own rarely talk about negatives in marriage. Dead beat dads, battered spouses, and incestuously abused children grow ever more common within these licensed units. Certain family models may provide statistically better environments for the masses, but this collectivist argument for public policy goes against individual liberty and responsibility.
Consider a separation of marriage and state. Eliminate marriage licensing. Strip the law of references to marital status. Decide that affairs of the heart are none of the government's business.
That would reduce the intrusion of government into our everyday lives. But do conservatives really mean what they say about less government? This idea would also mean that all people are equal before the law. Can that satisfy gay and lesbian activists?
Family life and matrimony will not end just because government gets out of the business. People got married long before officials issued little pieces of paper. With government out of the way, the private sector will fill the void.
Each religious denomination would continue to marry people. They can offer marriage contracts to pick up where Common Law falls short. No law should ever force a community of faith to perform a ceremony for those who don't share their values.
For those choosing to marry without a religious context, lawyers and paralegals can prepare the partnership contract. Office Depot could even carry standardized forms.
As far as government is concerned, marriage is a voluntary contract entered into by individuals. That won't change. One just wouldn't have to ask permission to do it. All of the legalities would still be in place with the courts to arbitrate any dissolution as necessary.
When adults fall in love, it's none of the government's business. These matters properly belong with families, churches, and the individuals involved. When that love grows to a point where individuals want to form a permanent union, there should be no governmental authority higher than that love. The responsibility to develop the relationship and the consequences of those actions belong to the individual parties.