Actually quite a few people that talk about "keeping government completely out of it" (not saying you personally - just a general reference) haven't really thought it through. If they had they would see that the legal recognition of a spouse as a non-blood family member has become tied to many aspects of interaction with the government. To the point that (a) most heterosexuals would not support their removal, or (b) removal would cause chaos.
There are 1138 federal laws (as per the last known CBO estimate) that involve the rights, responsibilities, and benefits of marriage. That doesn't includes hundreds more that exist within each state. So lets just run through a couple of examples...
As a retired military member my wife is part of the Survivor Benefit Plan which provides that if I die before her she will continue to draw a percentage of my retirement to care for her after the hardships of being a military spouse.
Social Security Provides that for married spouses that the surviving spouse, at retirement age, can draw the higher amount of either their own SS benefit or their spouses.
Tax law provides for tax free transfer of property to a spouse free of estate and gift taxes.
Tax law provides that an individuals estate sales exemption is $250,000 and $500,000 for a married couple - which makes sense because it's twice the single deduction. However a surviving spouse can continue to claim the married exemption for up to two years after the death of a spouse for the sale of their joint home.
The spouse of a veteran can be buried next to their loved one in a veterans cemetery.
Then there is the Family Medical Leave Act that guarantees a spouse can take unpaid leave to care for their spouse in the event of a serious illness.
The ability of a spouse to sue a third person for wrongful death of your spouse and loss of consortium.
Claiming the marital communications privilege which means a court cannot force one spouse to testify against another.
Then there is accelerated naturalization for someone married to a foreign national.
The legal right to visit and make medical decisions for a spouse recognized based on family status recognized under law in all 50 states (which cannot be duplicated with a Medical Power of Attorney which (a) can expire and (b) might not be recognized outside the issuing jurisdiction.
Governments are also involved with divorce in determining division of property and whether the income earner is required to provide continuing (permanent or temporary) support for the ex-spouse.
Once what "getting government out of marriage" truly means is recognized, there will be no great ground swell of opinion to - well - get government out of marriage.
>>>>
I'll go number by number to address these.
1.) A military member is a government employee, his wife gets government insurance, the exact same thing I'm advocating for. Insurance recognizing marriages, not government. If their government insurance didn't want to cover her if he died than he should have the right to try and purchase private insurance that would.
2.) I want social security done away with.
3.) These same benefits should be given to someone if they're a girlfriend or brother or sister, whomever the owner deems necessary.
4.) Same rights should be given to whomever the homeowner wants to put into place.
5.) If government has such regulations on it's cemetaries and the veteran thinks it's more important to be buried next to his wife than he can choose another cemetary.
6.) This, again, can be provided in private insurance companies or the companies the person works for. These things are choices.
7.) Anyone who's financially dependent on one person in case of a wrongful death should be able to sue if they can make the connection.
8.) I don't see how this is a good thing, if a husband kills someone his wife should testify against him or be punished.
9.) I'm mostly pro-amnesty, marriage isn't important here either.
10.) Again, this can be done within private insurance.
11.) If government doesn't recognize marriage they won't have to recognize divorce. If the couple is worried about potential divorce they should get a pre-nup and government can then be called upon to enforce a contract.
12.) See #11.
Well that was easy, seems like you didn't "think those ones through", I could say that, or I could act like a grown up and say you have a different opinion.
You have a different thought out opinion than my thought out opinion, we just disagree, I'm a small government fiscal conservative so our idealogies likely are very different.
