The Moral and Constitutional Case for a Right to Gay Marriage | Robert A. Levy | Cato Institute: Commentary

The Moral and Constitutional Case for a Right to Gay Marriage | Robert A. Levy | Cato Institute: Commentary: "For most of Western history, marriage was a matter of private contract between the betrothed parties and perhaps their families. Following that tradition, marriage today should be a private arrangement, requiring minimal or no state intervention. Some religious or secular institutions would recognize gay marriages; others would not; still others would call them domestic partnerships or assign another label. Join whichever group you wish. The rights and responsibilities of partners would be governed by personally tailored contracts — consensual bargains like those that control most other interactions in a free society."

"Nor is a ban on gay marriage a close fit for attaining the goals cited by proponents of such bans. If the goal, for example, is to strengthen the institution of marriage, a more effective step might be to bar no-fault divorce and premarital cohabitation."

Protecting marriage is best done on at the personal, community, etc levels -- not at the federal government level. Would there be less marriage problems if the federal government wasn't involved? The federal government first protected marriage against divorce but then opened the gates wide.