(May 23, 2012 at 6:42 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: At your age, I am not surprised at your attitude, as the practicalities of the matter are far over the horizon for you. When you get to the age where you have to think about the legal issues affected by incapacitation and death, the benefits of the legal benefits afforded by marriage become more apparent.
...and that's where I disagree with the legal institution of marriage. A state should not have the right to incentivise certain types of relationship by enforcing legal restrictions based on partnership status. It's simple interference with the aim of social control.
Anyone/any number of people should be free to commit to whomsoever they choose in whatever 'marital' construct they see fit as long as all parties are consenting & uncoerced. Matters of will, testament, decision-making etc. should be based on standard, free legal agreements (similar to tenancy contracts) which are freely available, binding when completed according to due process (witnesses etc.) and subject to change, without state interference, according to the will of the parties involved.
Sum ergo sum
