The State Has No Place "Sanctifying" Anything!

This country is founded on a fundamental separation of church and state. The state is defined as our governments: federal, state and local. It has become plain in the current arguments over same sex marriages that the state has been overstepping its bounds. The state simply has no business sanctifying any marriage, as "sanctity" is a religious term, inferring blessing. This means the state can only issue a union certificate, but not a marriage certificate. Marriage is the province of the church.

My brother the minister told me he was worried that the state was going to be able to tell him who he had to marry in his church, and that got me thinking. How is it that the state "sanctifies" marriage anyway?

What interest does the state have in conferring special status upon a union of two individuals? Is it for the propagation of the species? I don't buy that as a benefit. As a single man, I'm not entirely convinced it's in our society's best interest to encourage people to breed. Overpopulation is a serious problem no one acknowledges. There's no reason for the government to encourage reproduction, at any rate.

Should the state confer special status on united couples because they make our society more stable? Here, again, I don't hear any good arguments, either. How many crimes are committed because of failed or twisted relationships? Does coupling encourage stability or undermine it? We have a 50% divorce rate, so give me a break!

I'm pushing this to an almost absurd level to make a point: The state has no business being in the marriage business. The state can confer special status on a union of two people if it sees this as a benefit to the state or the society governed by the state. The best the state should be able to offer is a civil union. Marriage is the business of the church.