Wow, I killed the thread for two hours!

Nah, I think it was my musings on marriage that did it.

But is marriage really an institution that really serves society anymore, or is it a governmentally enforced vestige of patriarchy and financial transactions?

Speaking as a fairly privileged person here (straight, able to work, but not married), I think that marriage does not serve society anymore. My personal take is that marriage should be to serve the couple and no one else. Do I want to get married? Not necessarily in the legal sense, but I would like to have a ceremony of committment with my life partner.

Assuming, of course, I, you know, meet him.

I was just telling Greg yesterday that we should go back to the way they did it in the middle ages. Sign the legal contracts somewhere else, then go to the church (or place of choice) for a ceremony that means something to the participants without actually linking the two.

Have you guys read the article about the couple who got married without a license? The girl's father is a pastor, and he is telling all of his congregants not to get a marriage license because the state they're in changed the titles on the license from Husband and Wife to Party 1 and Party 2.

The girl's father is a pastor, and he is telling all of his congregants not to get a marriage license

It's worked for polygamists for years.

It certainly seems odd. I mean, isn't he then telling them it's okay to live in sin because he knows about it and they had a nice party?

I hadn't thought of that with the polygamists, but it makes sense. I think that was a "duh" moment for me.

isn't he then telling them it's okay to live in sin

Ah, but they're not living in sin, their union was blessed by God. And he's suddenly demonstrated that marriage is a religious thing, separate from government, so all the governmental rights of marriage should be available to anyone.

I read on a blog, maybe feministing, that one couple feels their wedding is ruined because it says Party A and B and not Bride and Groom, maybe it's the same couple. They said that this proves that same sex marriage adversely effects opposite sex marriage. Which just is lame to me.

Personally I like the seperate religious and civil ceremonies. Plenty of people don't get married in a church or with a religious ceremony. My aunt is a Notary Republic and she married a couple who got married at a lake in swim suits. They jumped in afterwards.

I have a couple, both friends, who had two completely different weddings. The first one, which is the LEGAL one AND the religious one, was performed by a shaman.

A week later, they had the fluffy dress family wedding, and skated around the issue of signing the license. The officiant was the grooms old art teacher, and he was in the know, but I don't think the fam know, to this day.

My friend A is currently on her second of three marriages - one about a month ago at the JoP, one Muslim ceremony two weeks later with his (Egyptian) family, and one planned for the spring in Costa Rica for all the friends

Since marriage is a contract, it IS easier to just use the one the state has already written for you. Here's Calif. statutory law re marriage [link] This + case law and you're all set.