I would tend to agree with the marriage position, the state has no business in the marriage contract.

But I assume you would also argue that some 'arrangements' would have to be illegal, no matter what group or religion allows it. I am thinking in particular in regards to minors. But that would be more of a criminal matter than civil matter, but it would have to be codified in very strict language of law if the state were properly out of the marriage contract business. It would have to be very precise so that there were no loopholes to be exploited, by any group at any time.

And I am curious about Flaps friends position. If the state got out of all things marriage then could you make the case that as an employer I can discriminate on the basis of a marriage partnership of which I disapprove? If nearly anything goes then should I be forced to support a 'lifestyle' I find offensive by providing someone in that lifestyle with a salary and benefits? I don't hate anyone and I can respect someones right to marry whom they wish or live as they see fit, but should have the right to not pay to support said choice. Should Chick-fil-A or Hobby Lobby be forced to insure those lifestyles they have publicly denounced? They most likely do without knowledge or under coercion of lawsuit, but if the state were out of it and a co-woker heard about their partner at home could these guys terminate the person because they do not want to provide benefits for "alternative lifestyles"?