You assert that it is someone’s right to interpret what marriage is or is not in your post, and you give several examples.

Is it also within someone’s right to define what they mean by murder? Theft? Government sanction and definition of terms is both commonplace and necessary for the rule of law to be able to order the conduct of society. Words have meaning, and when multiple interpretations of the same word are allowed, confusion can result.

Marriage as a union between man and women has pre dated modern western society by several thousand years, and it appears to be reasonably widespread concept across continents and cultures. Are their cultures with other arrangements as the norm — yes. Are they in the ‘mainstream of the modern world?’ It seems not. Marriage as the union between a man and a woman is prevalent in Asia, Europe, Australia, South America and North America. There are special cases where marriage also exists between a man and more than one woman, most commonly in the Muslim culture.

Our culture has honored the institution of marriage as a religious or cultural event for centuries, and our culture has valued the special relationship which arises from a ‘nuclear family’ living in freedom and raising children to be self sufficient as well as civilized members of society. The fact that our laws make provisions to ensure that widows and children automatically inherit the estate of the father or widowers and children inherit the estate of the mother (most typically jointly shared by the spouses), is a means to ensure that they remain as self sufficient as possible. This is a good thing — unless you believe that all property should revert to the state so that wealth can be redistributed for the state’s purpose, over-riding the needs of the family.

There are currently no barriers to exercising free choice and leaving your estate to anyone you might name — but it is presumed that this must be a conscious choice.