...Your view on the reasons for marriage are awfully narrow. I guess love and companionship cannot be factored as reasons for wanting a marriage.
We aren't discussing all the reasons someone might WANT to marry, but why society might want to recognize marriage and make it a part of public law. That was done, before the Bible was written and now, FOR THE GOOD OF THE CHILDREN. That was why many states had tough divorce laws.
Once marriage is divorced from that concept, and just becomes about feeling good and emotional involvement, then marriage - THAT type of marriage - has no meaning for the state. Years ago, a cop friend of mine in Tucson told me of a homeless guy known for 'loving' his Nike shoe...in public! I don't much care what someone feels or what acts they perform with a Nike sneaker, but that isn't the institution of marriage that has been around for thousands of years. Nike shoes don't produce offspring.
And while there have always been heterosexual marriages that didn't produce children, most did - and THAT was what the STATE cared about - a stable family unit that produced a stable next generation.
If marriage is about 'love', then people OUGHT to be able to marry their dogs or horses. Most dogs are a lot more lovable than most humans, and I have a higher regard for a lot of horses than a lot of folks, too. Marriage, as a state institution, isn't about love
. If a man decides he loves another man's wife, and she loves him, should they both divorce and marry each other? Until the 60s, the answer was no - and it was no because of the impact on children (and to a lesser extent, on women). That impact was what justified state involvement. The state cares no more about who you love than I do...