“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” First Amendment “…No state shall…deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” 14th Amendment If this is the case, what the hell is marriage law?Laws regulating who can marry who and what benefits you receive are clearly unconstitutional.Not only do they violate the First Amendment by respecting an establishment of religion (marriage in the traditional way we have it on the books is clearly an establishment of religion) but theyalso violate the 14th Amendment by giving advantages to heterosexual married couples that other folks don’t get.That goes against the Constitution (the highest law in the land).Why have we (we the people) allowed the government to do this when so many of us are not heterosexual married people? Is there something about heterosexual married people that we like so much we think they deserve special treatment over everyone else?Real marriage law, marriage law that upholds the constitution, would look like the following:-Women and men can marry. -Women and women can marry. -Men and men can marry.-Family members can marry although procreation would not be recommended.-Anyone can marry anyone (18-year-old limit would still stand because it is a legal contractand you need to be 18 for a contract to be enforceable) -Groups of people can all marry each other. I’m not advocating polygamy in the sense that one guy can have a wife and a family in five different states. I’m saying that if four or five or whatever number of people are all in love with each other, they should be able to enjoy the benefits of marriage.Do we think that three men (or women or any combination of men, women, transgender, and those who don’t identify with gender) who all claim to love each other are lying?Is the human emotion felt by people that aren’t heterosexual, in this case love, not real emotion?How can we say that two men and two women (all bisexual) can’t all love each other together?And it would be impossible for the government to follow the guidelines of marriage that are outlined in the Bible and other holy texts. We can’t go around acting as if the Bible is right.Wouldn’t that mean the Earth was created about 6,000 years ago? Where did the dinosaur bones come from? Where did the oil come from? How are we going to explain to the Chinese that their county and ancient dynasties aren’t really as old as they think they are? Should we stone people to death that enjoy sex with members of the same sex? Should we outlaw gambling and call people that enjoy sex evil?There are countless examples of why religious holy texts are clearly not accurate depictions of the history of humanity. If America is supposed to have a separation of church and state, why are we so unwilling to think outside the Biblical box on marriage?It is not the place of government to impose the will of religion on people, especially in a place as diverse as the United States.The final step is to no longer call it marriage. The word “marriage” is an establishment of religion that doesn’t belong in our laws. How about civil unions? Everybody gets a civil union. It doesn’t matter who you want to get it with.I know this is a stretch for many of you but it is a necessary way to stop discrimination against non-heterosexuals. The 14th Amendment demands that all people be protected equally under the laws. Giving the benefits of marriage to some that you don’t give to others certainly qualifies as illegal, institutionalized discrimination.