Do you think the government should stay out of your marriage?

I agree totally.

I am a married heterosexual - but before I got married I lived with my wife for many years. Neither of us believed that we needed the government to sanction our relationship; we placed no value on our marriage license except for the fiscal benefits it offered us - the ability to file joint tax returns, to have the same health insurance policy cover us both, to be able to make health decisions for each other, etc.

So what does this have to do with whether or not we're sleeping together? My former college roommate never married - when his parents died he and his unmarried sister bought a house together. Why can't they file joint returns? Why is the government concerned with their sex life or lack of it?

I remember at some point in my life reading stories of elderly couples, people who had been married for 25 or 30 or 40 years tearfully filing for divorce because they couldn't afford the "marriage penalty" in their taxes.

The government only has what power we give to it. That older couple allowed the government to define their marriage and were made miserable by it. Today, the GLBT community is allowing the government to define their relationships, which only makes them angry and unhappy.

I would gladly turn in my certificate of marriage in exchange for a certificate of civil union for the purpose of fiscal and economic status, and continue to define my own marriage in the way I choose.

Wow, that's a complicated question (although a good one) that calls in to my answer the feelings I have on other issues. But I'll be succinct. I'm a registered Independent who is also never married but who also respects marriage. In fact, I greatly admire those who stay married because I'm too selfish to be part of any long-term relationship. I'm also a big believer in "lean and mean" government. However, because marriage in the United States involves two entities coming together and merge their assets for the betterment of the "unit", the need for legality is paramount - even if they stay together. That isn't to say lawyers need to be consulted in order to get married. It's really just a taxation formality to get a license. I think the government has more important things to do than to get dragged into any divorce proceedings that go that far, but I think the best way to go about keeping Uncle Sam out is to implore those who want to get married to do a lot of homework.

Well. Obviously most people aren't going to agree with my answer but I don't see how government can stay out of the marriage business. After all not everyone belongs to a church, synagogue or mosque which means that there are huge numbers of people who need to get married by someone - and that is where government steps in. You've heard of "civil unions" haven't you? Anyone not married in a religious ceremony has been married in a civil ceremony by a judge. And since a judge is a governmental employee that makes it governmental business. Unless you can come up with a better, and legal, solution, civil ceremonies will continue to be held. It's easy to be idealistic but not always practical.

I believe that marriage is a personal affair, and the government should only constitute your marriage if there is a risk to a couple of people.

I mean, if your [other half] was beating you mercilessly for days on end, you'd want some form of interruption from the government in order to stop your [other half] beating your a***!

I think the goverment should stay out of the marriage thing

You and your mother would make a great couple.