Knibb High football rules!
"... as a legal matter, separating marriage from the government entirely may be just too much, at least in the United States. Helen Dale, a three-time fellow at the Institute for Humane Studies and a classical liberal trained in different types of legal systems, wrote a brief in defense of same-sex marriage recognition for the Reason Foundation (the non-profit that publishes Reason.com and Reason Magazine). As a “libertarian aside” in her brief (pdf), she detailed how America’s significant use of common law in family courts—that is, the accumulation of case law built up over years of precedents—may be a huge hurdle to such a broad libertarian goal."
Why the United States Can
That said, there's a lot of bull**** in that article as well, you have to admit. The author seems to have a dog in the hunt.... maybe a bit of confirmation bias seeping through.
Take this gem... "For example, Dale asked, what would happen in a system where marriages were treated as entirely private contracts if a couple decided to enter in a relationship defined by Sharia Law? What would happen if parts of the contract contradicted rights recognized by constitutional precedents or case law?"
Well, Dale, you can't write ANY contract that contradicts state or federal law, so I guess that answers that, huh?
Last edited by Peter Grimm; 05-23-13 at 01:57 PM.
I don't see how it's that hard really. The only problem is existing contracts, but the government can just deal with those contracts like any other. As for families all that really matters is custody. How is it not easy? It's not as if libertarians want to replace it with a system that does anywhere near as much. We are only interested in contract law and the rights of the child. Nothing else matters really.