Great point. Marriage will probably remain as an cultural artifact and that's about it. If marriage means everything then it means nothing-- people just won't bother getting married. Europe is already ahead of us in this respect. It's been a long time coming, from no-fault divorce to a culture where personal happiness is the only standard by which we make decisions.
Yep. To put it another way, take the question "to whom should X be married?" If the answer is "it's 100% personal preference - no choice is better than another" - then the state shouldn't get involved. We don't pass laws encouraging you to wear blue instead of green, because it's just a matter of preference. So if your marriage choices don't matter to anyone, why should society bother recognizing and investing in them?
MARRIAGE may be a pointless cultural artifact, but the legal benefits they endow are certainly not pointless. I'm not gonna skip out on tax breaks and shared ownership and various other rights with someone I intend to spend my life with, just because I'm too lazy.
Though, if there was (as I envision it) a state-based 'civil union' that conveyed those benefits, and also 'marriage' which was purely church-based and conveyed no benefits legally (though of course those getting married would also file for a 'civil union') I might skip out on the church part.
