Two
people? How about we be more specific, counselor? For ages state marriage was (and still is in at least 31 states) understood to be a social contract between two people - one
man and one
woman. Only in recent times have some people sought to change that to also include two men or two women. Society defined what marriage was years ago when the subject was polygamy and nobody said jack. But now, when it comes to gay marriage, we should redefine things? If you're honest, you'll admit the inconsistency and hypocrisy of this. Given that you're a lawyer, however, I realize honesty may be a tall request.
And it was relatively recent (actually in my life time) that some states defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman
of the same race. The US Supreme Court identified marriage as a fundamental right and the due process clause and equal protection clause demands that the right be available to the State's citizens on a nondiscriminatory basis. Certainly, you will agree that it was appropriate to "redefine" marriage in this instance even though for generations marriage laws specifically precluded whites and non-whites marrying each other. Moreover, marriage has been defined and redefined over the years by state common law.
There are deep public policy arguments against including polygamous relationships within the rights of a civil marriage. Propietary rights, tax and estate issues, commercial and liability concerns (just to name a few) are compromised in such relationships. Similarly, the State should not allow blood relatives to marry for a variety of practical reasons.
Gay couples are just as capable as straight couples in fulfilling the legal obligations of marriage.
