Interesting proposal on Marriage in America

I would like to know what my readers (such that there are) think about this article which suggests a way out of the current debate over 'gay marriage' in the United States.

Basically, he says that the government should not issue marriages to anyone. Only religious communities such as churches or synagogues should do so. The government should simply have a civil contract that it issues to anyone who wants it: gay or straight or whatever, which will involve certain shared rights, priviledges, ownership, tax status, etc., but which will not be a "marriage." Marriage will become an exclusively religious institution. The government, likewise, would no longer be involved in divorces at all, but would simply disolved a civil contract. Whether someone was "divorced" or could remarry would become a question for religious officials.

Marriage has been a public institution with legal standing throughout Western History, and such a change would represent a fundamental shift in our civilization. It might be short-sighted to make such a shift to deal with the controversy of the moment, a shift that could have unforseen consequences. On the other hand, given the proliferation of worldviews among individuals or sub-cultural social groups in our society, each worldview with its own values and convictions, it may be that the shift has already happened. The gay marriage issue will not go away, and this might simply be an example of the law keeping pace with the people.

Another consideration is whether those invovled in the debate will really be happy with this compromise. The very idea of compromise as a political virtue has fallen on hard times - if not altogether died - in American political discourse, and I wonder if many will not be able to accept this one? Those on the left - many of whom are parts of religious communities and want the law to change precisely in order to also influence the position of their churches - may not be happy with this change. On the other side, in an effort to fight divorce many traditionalists have backed laws that actually deepen the connection between state and marriage and church - such as "covenant marriages" in my own state, which are harded to get into and more difficult to get out of (both require extensive counselling) than traditional marriages. The assumption is of course that, as marriage is good for society (numerous studies on various facets of social existence can substantiate this, if we can agree that the word "good" has a definable application here), the state has an interest in promoting more stable marriages.

The place of marriage in our common social life may increasingly come under scrutiny since, because of the already-mentioned increasing divergence ('diversity' or 'disagreement') of philosophies, I strongly suspect our legal system will become more and more reductionist over time - speaking firmly on fewer and fewer issues as more and more become debated. I firmly believe that laws against polygamy, incest, and even prostitution will be increasingly difficult to defend if our society chooses a libertinism course on homosexual marriage (if consenting adults want it, we should allow it since - supposedly - that is what freedom means). I believe that our society probably will eventually choosen a libertine course over a 'natural law' or 'common good' approach, since we have already done so on other issues (such as pornography). So I find this proposal to 'abandon the marriage question' very interesting...