Registered marriage? Now there's a concept I could live with. That, and a simplified tax code along with the elimination of base-line budgeting would solve a whole lot of financial witlessnesses. No one seems to notice just how very moronic people inside the Beltway are. Must be something in the water.

Since you're bringing up God, you'll read that God wanted man to expand and cover the whole earth. The obvious outcome of such would be a bit of inbreeding. To suggest that, because of inbreeding, we're not supposed to intermarry, is ignoring another statement from Genesis, viz., ALL MEN ARE OF ONE BLOOD. Since that's a fact, supported by the fact that intermarriage leads to healthy offspring, questioning intermarriage suggests an attempt to stir the pot, just because.

I feel the need, on this celebratory weekend of freedom in the USA, to poke a hornets nest. Since it was brought up here, why not?

Why is it rational and objective to limit ones institutions and freedoms? Why, if marriage is used for reasons other than procreation (else once a woman reached menopause, she should be disallowed from marriage ever again...) should it be limited to only a certain group, disallowing others from that same right and privilege?

Or are we the land of opportunity, except for certain of our population? Why is non-procreational marriage fine and wonderful - unless it's a group you don't agree with, or think is "bizarre" or "unnatural"? And if so - why is interracial marriage OK? Seriously - if God meant for races to intermarry, wouldn't he have put them all on the same continent? Hmmm???

I'll wait for your downvotes, there are enoughh non-objective, non-rational "conservatives" on this board to get me a few, but I''d love to know the RATIONAL and OBJECTIVE reason for getting a thumb down.

I have just one question for this discussion: what do we do about the children? Who is naturally responsible for the raising of any children? Marriage under civil law, is all about assigning that responsibility, and that authority. No Objectivist would ever think of putting children into a crèche. So what does a private marriage model do for an alternative?

Marriage is a religious sacrament and the government should not be involved. For many years they were not and it was only when the IRS was formed and it was decided to make us unequal in the governments eyes by treating us different depending on whether or not we were married. There may have been other factors, such as race relations, but I believe that was the big step with the government being involved and determining

Once again, "government" has meddled in things it has little to do with. As I understand it, "Marriage" was invented to codify the rules of inheritance. That is to say, it's "for the children" (as statists always fall back on when they want to inject some idea into society). Now that we have DNA testing, maybe 'marriage' has outlasted it's usefulness!? On the other hand, with communist/socialists always trying to eliminate inheritance (end capitalism/private property) there would be no need for 'marriage.' Eliminating the Income Taxation system (what I call modern slavery -- the 13 & 14th amendments ended the peculiar institution, the 16th reinstated it on a wider basis with different 'masters.' Once we pass the FairTax Act the governmental benefits of being married will be greatly reduced.

I'm not certain that marriage can be fully "privatized". The government will always need to be able to make judgments about inheritance, and I'm not certain that it can do this without some definition of marriage.

And since it would no longer be "permitted", judges would start charging for presiding over a dissolution.

There does seem to be an emerging concept of switching from a 'licensing' model to a 'registration' model. This has the subtle characteristic of the government not being involved in the permission to marry, simply in registering the existence of the contract.

Marriage in the US is a function or our tax code, welfare regulations, child custody and laws on inheritance of property. It is not marriage in the old sense of the word and trying to make it so is futile.