Gay Marriage - everybody seems to be missing the point

Today i'm going to blog about the Gay Marriage debate currently roiling the United States.  While the topic is certainly controversial, I don't think that my opinion will be.

The fundamental mistake in our marriage laws is not that they exclude same sex relationships.  The fundamental mistake is that such laws exist at all.

Historically the rules of marriage were governed by a religious institution and codified into law.  Now this didn't lead to much dissension when an overwhelmingly Catholic country codified the standards as defined by the Vatican.  However in this age of multicultural societies with multiple faiths, this is no longer meaningful or appropriate.

Why should the laws of Canada reflect the standards of the Anglican Church and the Catholic Church?  I'll give you an example....under the laws of Canada, marrying your first cousin is permitted.  This is surprising to many.  Marrying your first cousin is allowed by the Anglican Church and the Catholic Church.  However, it is not allowed under Eastern Orthodox Christianity.

There is no reciprocity with religious organizations.  While a marriage in a Catholic Church is recognized as legitimate under law, the same does not apply in reverse.  As one who has been divorced, I could not marry a Catholic girl in Church because in the eyes of the Catholic Church, I am still married.  Rather curious since I am not Catholic and my ex wife is Hindu.

Those who claim to oppose gay marriage ostensibly for the purpose of defending the traditional definition of marriage should be asked which "traditional" type of marriage they are defending.  Is it a Catholic/Anglican definition of marriage?  There are "traditional" marriages in other faiths such as Islam and the Church of Latter Day Saints which would be considered invalid under the laws of Canada and the United States.

Really the "threat" to a traditional view of marriage comes from attempting to codify it.

Here is a really radical idea:  Government should get out of the business of defining marriage.  It's really not the place of Government to take one religion's standards and make them apply to all.  A religious "Marriage" should be defined by the controlling religious authority.  ie the Vatican can decide for Catholics and an Ayatollah can define marriage for Shiite Muslims.

I've attended communions in Catholic churches.  Communions are not defined in law but it doesn't seem to make it any less meaningful to those who are receiving communion and their families.

As to the economic aspect of marriage such as rights of survivorship for property, pension etc, any two (or more) legally competent individuals should be able to sign a contract pooling their resources and agreeing on how to divide up assets upon dissolution of the contract.

Recently elderly sisters applied to the European Commission on Human Rights claiming that they were being discriminated against since they did not have rights of survivorship while a lesbian couple would.  They lost the case but the pointed out an obvious flaw to same sex marriage as currently applied.  Why is their sisterly relationship less valid than a same sex partnership?

In fact, if any two people should decide to live together in a platonic relationship, should their relationship not get the same recognition simply because they aren't having sex with each other?

My pension is something that I have earned by contributing.  My employer's contribution is a form of compensation.  I should be able to designate anyone I want to be a beneficiary....regardless of whether the beneficiary is a wife, husband, partner or friend.

Really I'm saying that it's a silly debate.  Government should only do what only government can do.  In this case, the Government should simply repeal marriage laws and replace them with a law allowing competent adults to enter an economic relationship if they wish, without passing judgment based on the rather bizarre issue of whether they are in a relationship where they are having sex with each other or not.