Banning Gay Marriage and Protecting Gay Marriage, at the Same Time

There was a piece in the Los Angeles Times of a liberal Democrat supporting prop 8, the ban on gay marriages, to protect kids.

"Marriage (and only marriage) unites the three core dimensions of parenthood -- biological, social and legal -- into one pro-child form: the married couple."

Liberals want laws legalizing gay marriage(equal rights for all couples, gay or straight), conservatives want laws banning gay marriage (to protect straight marriages and for the children upbringing). However as a libertarian, I don't think the proper place for marriage is run by the State Government. The state is too far removed for the day to day lives of individuals and local organizations. Politicians and government hundreds if not thousands of miles away are making choices for us, where individuals and local organizations need to make their own choices. The proper place for the decision to grant or acknowledge a marriage is through the churches, fellowship organizations, and individuals.

"Marriage says to a child: The man and the woman whose sexual union made you will also be there to love and raise you. Marriage says to society as a whole: For every childborn, there is a recognized mother and a father, accountable to the child and to each other."

I know for myself, I want my child to have a Mom and Dad, and family to learn and grow together. However, I do not think the State Legal system is the appropriate way to garner these results for myself, and for others if they do choose. Just because a law is placed in the State Legal framework, does not mean it will be followed. For example, the divorce rate of hetero couples is 50%, and perhaps even 66% in Southern California. Those broken families include children. The idea that a state marriage will hold the bond for a child does not hold. The idea of accountability of a mom and dad to a child does not hold via a state marriage. When the power to grant marriages is given back to the local organization, there is a better chance, imho, that these ideas of accountability will hold. The local organization is their to help continue the bond and council in times of strife, and celebrate in times of success. For example, when was the last time the State of TX sent you a bday wish?;) But I would be local fellowship wished you a wonderful celebration.

In essence, there would be a ban and a protection of gay marriage ALL AT THE SAME TIME. Individual organizations would be able to ban gay marriage or include gay marriage. There would be some organizations that would grant gay marriages, and some that would not, and the state would have no say, just the local organization. For example, a Christian Marriage by the Church would most likely be only hetero, but another type of marriage by another local organization could be gay. However, the State would NOT be able to force a Church to grant/recongnize a homo marriage. That would be wrong.