Heh. Will, to tell the truth, I come down a bit on both side, which is probably dangerous. I can see John’s argument that there is no need for calling gay couples “married”, and I tend towards preferring slow social change as safer. The nuclear family is a recent change that came on a bit too fast IMHO.

However, there are undoubtedly forces driving these changes that run deeper than preference, economic forces for example. As was mentioned earlier in the thread, the spread of the Hutterites — I think it is actually mostly the Amish and Mennonites — to midwestern farm lands that no one else can afford to farm, is an example of economic forces at work. Likewise the thinning of the countryside in places like NM.

The only reason for govenment to be involved at all is children, and this is also new and not everyone will agree on this either, often for traditional or religious reasons. How to handle children is an open question, but perhaps a coupling should take on special significance once children are involved. As in married, with children (where have I heard *that* before).

I also suspect that if homosexual couples were accepted as a normal part of society, the push towards marriage would subside. To some extent, I think it is an attempt to gain acceptance of homosexuality by borrowing a word with sacred connotations to others.