I once floated the idea of a "Signifigant Other" legislation that would supplement the legal title of marriage with another legal partnership that would enable anyone to have a relatonship that house the same entitlements as a marriage, or more, or less.
In my mind, there's no reason to simply stop with same sex couples. Years ago as a single man when I worked in a benefit rich job, I was paid $20.00 per hour plus benefits. The fellow next to me had three children, a wife and was paid the same amount per hour as me.
The fellow next to me received benefits for himself AND his wife, AND children. He also was taxed LESS and recieved a government supplement EVERY month based on his income and the amount children he had.
Now I don't begrudge my work mate the fact that he could use a little extra what with all those mouths to feed. What I do begrudge is that not only was he paid more than me for the same job, unless I was willing to enter into the same kind of partnership that he was, I couldn't even avail myself of those extra benefits.
Enter "Signifigant Other" legislation, a law that would allow any single person to attatch benefits accrual from their own efforts to another of their choice. It would be different from a marriage in that it need not be necessarily a relationship founded on marital love. Nor would it be exclusive, you could both enjoin "Signifigant Other" legislation AND marriage.
For me, back then, I could have use SO legislation to bestow my benefit package on my Mom. That's what I would have done. But no need to limit that, you could use SOL (lol) to bestow your benefits on your best friend, your cousin, your neighbor, anyone you chose. Further to this, the legislation could be as varied as necessary and as binding as you wanted it to be.
Let's talk about redefining a family and see how that fits into the idea of a marriage or SO contract.