Marriage - Separation of Church and State

The state (or society in general) in our liberal tradition has an interest in maintaining a stable population and in child rearing. This requires maintainance of the family as a basic unit. (Our society does not favor child rearing by the community). These days having children is increasingly a planned event and and least in the socioeconomic sense is a sacrifice by the child rearers that has benefit for other members of the community. It is appropriate therefore for the state to compensate for this sacrifice by offering tax and other economic advantages such as shared medical insurance and social security benefits. Such benefits are not appropriate for other relationships between adults which do not involve child rearing (ex, a gay couple or a childless married couple). Both individuals in such a relationship are capable of supporting themselves and giving special consideration in this case is not only unnecessary but is a loss to others who must bear the cost. This consideration by the state should not be called "marriage" which has a traditional and religious meaning.

In fact in my opinion the state should take a more positive role to enforce appropriate child rearing in the case of those who take on a family unit relationship either through procreation or adoption. This would be far preferable to the present day tendency for the state to substitute for the family.

Matters such as inheritance and power of attorney can and should be handled by other legal methods than state designation of "marriage" which implies a laundry list of legal arrangements that could be handeled separately by a simple arrangement such as with the "living will".

"Marriage" should be an individual, private matter, either sanctioned by religion according to individual moral beliefs or by a simple declaration by the persons involved. Perhaps this would help to end the confusion over what to call the increasing number of cohabiting couples.