Philip Newton's journal

Okay. Here in New Jersey:
1. Children can have any last name at all--my best friend's son has neither her last name nor his father's (yes, she and the father are married) because she's never changed her last name, but Immigration has messed up her husband's papers and so his legal last name is not his real last name. They're in the process of getting his last name legally changed, at which point she'll change her last name to match his, but their son already has his father's real (but so far, not legal) last name. Anyway, so in New Jersey a child can have any last name. In some states, children of married couples must take the father's last name, but children of unmarried women can take either the mother's name or the father's name. I've never heard of children born to unwed mothers having to take the mother's last name.
2. Both unmarried couples and gay couples can adopt children, and if one woman in a lesbian relationship has a child, the other partner can adopt the child so both are legally the child's mother (assuming there is no father).

Legal rights of married couples include: lower rates on automobile, health and life insurance; right to make medical and legal decisions for the other person if s/he is incapacitated; right to see the other person in the hospital [intensive-care units normally admit only immediate family]; lower interest rates on mortgages; being the automatic heir of the other person's estate. (In the US, married couples pay higher taxes than single people, not lower ... it's a bit more complicated than that, since married people whose spouses don't work pay lower taxes, but dual-income married people pay higher.)

The state's interest in promoting marriage is simple: married people, on the whole, are healthier, happier and more stable than unmarried people. (Also, they pay higher taxes, as I said.) Also, as you said, promoting the growth of the population.

I'm curious why you think marriage, family and children (on the whole) are "all ethical/religious in nature and not so much secular," especially since you went on to mention people wanting to be committed to each other before they have children, which is dead on. Areligious people want to have children too, and they want to bring them up in a committed relationship. Also, you seem to assume (in that sentence) that ethics cannot be secular. Why?

Not trying to start a fight here, and I hope you know that—I'm really curious as to why you hold the opinions that you do.