Dealing Objectively w/ Gay Marriage

From Burning Giraffe @ Democracy Forums:

The argument for gay marriage is grounded in civil rights, on the basis that the federal government shouldn't have the right to say that one kind of relationship is worthy of marriage and another kind of relationship is not. The argument against gay marriage is that, historically, marriage has been defined as a contract between a man and woman, and that gay marriage is something new that exists outside of that precedent.

The government looks at gay marriage from the standpoint of taxation and regulation, which is the nature of the governments' relationship to marriage and marriage law. The definition of marriage as between a man and a woman is essentially a religious definition, not a political one, just as marriage has often been the domain of established religious traditions. In my opinion, this is where marriage should begin and end.

The federal government does not have the Constitutional authority to tax or regulate individuals differently one the basis of anything, making a progressive income tax and regulated income tax brackets unconstitutional. All the 16th amendment stipulates is that the Federal Government can collect income taxes without regard to any census or enumeration. Which means that legally, the Congress cannot tax us differently based on whether or not we are married or whether or not our marriage is of a heterosexual or homosexual nature.

Because of the unconstitutional applications derived from the 16th amendment, I believe that it should be overturned and removed from the constitution. In so doing, there will no longer be any tax penalties or privileges for married couples. Marriage could then be turned over to the individuals and the churches, where it belongs. Then the government, if it chooses to, can establish law governing the rights of family members and domestic partners with regard to legal matters of every kind. These "civil unions" would not be allowed to discriminate on the basis of any census data whatsoever, and all domestic partnerships would be equally protected.

This seems to me the only reasonable, Constitutional way to treat the issue of gay marriage.

It also seems to me that the future debate over gay marriage will either lead to more or less government regulation, taxation, and intrusiveness into our lives. It is therefore, advisable that the government indeed remove itself from the issue of marriage all together, and from awarding penalties and privileges based on marital status.