California's top court overturns gay marriage ban

[Supergirl]

I think we need to outlaw the government from recognizing marriage. Tax wise, individual filing for every one. Just my solid belief that marriage falls into the religious category, not government.

I would actually be totally OK with this. Eliminate any legal marital contract, and all tax benefits that come with it. Allow tax benefits for having children only, or eliminate that as well.

Then all couples would simply have to fill out medical proxy forms, giving their partner all the rights to medical decision making in event of emergency, and access to them in hospitals and ERs. And the progressive, non-fascist religious groups could continue to perform religious weddings, and other people could have secular ceremonies.

However, we're already on this path.

I might point out, as others have done before me, that had it not been for a few "activist judges" our schools would still be segregated and interracial marriage would still be illegal. The list of long when it comes to things judges have needed to take a stand on, as representatives of our judicial system and the principles laid out in our Consitution, because the people are too bigoted to vote the right way when given the chance.

[Extra Stout]

I would have no problem with a system wherein sexual partners, or other kinds of households, such as an adult living with an elderly parent, or two siblings, etc., could apply to be declared a household according to the law with the concomitant legal status.

However, another poster once posed the question, which I could not answer, in part because I did not feel strongly enough to research it: what benefits are denied to couples who are not allowed to marry or form "legal" households, which cannot be obtained by other means?

Insurance partner benefits come to mind.

[Supergirl]

here's a start: http://www.buddybuddy.com/mar-list.html