The right of the espoused to be considered family when it comes to hospital choices,and inheritance?

Those are impactful

And I'm just grazing the tip of it

what is the point of these? why require paying money to the government just for THEM to recognizing what YOU are already doing? Why are you not just telling them this is how it is?

why does the government have the power to just change that on you?

I mean...

"we no longer allow unions for your situation"

Marriage is an option.

why is that even an option?

I'm not proposing any radical changes other than secularizing a federal system

you are missing the point entirely. I get what they do, but why are you giving the government that power? Why are you not just writing these things down and the government is just forced to recognize it.

That opens the door to all kinds of fraud...

The government hands out the benefits associated with being married and as such they have the right to keep a record of who receives their benefits

Plus ive never heard of anyone being turned down when they asked for a marriage license

There is nothing to prevent you from just living with someone anyway

And common law marriage is a thing, too

But the legal establishment of these things protects the participants against fraud, among other things.

fraud of what? benefits they are giving out for really no reason?

why was marriage even made a government thing in the first place?

what do they get out of it/

They encourage people to have children would be my guess

The path of reasoning you're on with this seems like it's anarchal in nature.

then they have a lot of freeloaders if its for children

Encourage, not mandate

you could encourage people to have children by actually giving these bonuses for having children. not just living together.

that would have prevented the whole same sex marriage problem entirely

at least in terms of legal standing

@RyeNorth anarchal for wanting the government to stop a program that cause problems and solves nothing?

They do have provisions for that in welfare and in tax breaks

Marriage was supposed to promote stable two parent homes,yes

That's why joint filing and tax breaks for dependents are things

Supposed to, yet it bound two people for life without requiring a kid. Rather than just give them benefits while they have kids who are under whatever is considered the legal age.

And then they have had to patch it again and again and again because it sucked at it's job

still no farmlands? I thought it was out yesterday?

But the point is, if you DO think two people should be able to do as they please in that regard, that should not abolish benefits for the others.

Isnt that what the government should do? fix/change a system when it goes wrong?

yes, they should. And this system never really worked to start with, so they should redesign it from the ground up and start working towards that better system because it covers a bunch of crap that could be split up into different realms of responsibility.

Seems like its working if people are getting married and having kids

Different realms of responsibility?

Are we still talking about marriage or have we moved on?

that is a horrible metric for it working.