Expanding the Definition of Marriage Equality

The Defense of Marriage Act, Virginia’s attempt to criminalize oral sex, the debate in Utah over same sex marriage, all reflect this countries obsession with religious principles and invasive interest in the private bedroom behavior of our citizens.

 By participating in this debate society gives implied approval that the government has a legitimate interest in the private behavior of its citizens.  Left out are individuals who engage in plural marriage, the trans gendered community and those who just wish engage the legal rights of those closest to them to enter into a binding contract that protects the rights of their families.

At the base of these events is an emerging ethic that all citizens should have the right to engage in the legal benefits of marriage regardless of personal private behavior. In a Plural society, the government should have no interest in “what the marriage contract means in terms of private behavior”.  The legal rights and protections of marriage should be accessible to all Americans.

If you are single and wish to engage these rights to insure that your best friend can make decisions for you, have access to your funds in the event of your death etc., the protection of a legally recognized contract should be available to you.

While I do and will continue to support the efforts of groups like the HRC, just maybe, the time has come to abandon the obsessive and invasive Victorian framework that has dominated these discussions.  Government has no justifiable interest in the private legal behavior of its’ population.  Lets define the marriage contract as available to everyone and remove the arrogant assumption that personal behavior should even be considered when engaging our rights.

The religious arguments about marriage belong within religious communities, not enshrined in law!