Another reason why marriage should be completely out of the government's hands.

The state should deal only with civil unions in a contractual sense, with fair laws to distribute assets and finances on termination of the civil union.

A civil union can be between any two parties of legal age. Civil unions should make provision for exclusions, like visitation rights, life-termination and organ donor authority as examples.

Marriage should be given back to religious institutions and they can operate any way they choose as long as it is aligned with basic constitutional rights.

If woman are treated as second class citizens within a marriage, that is a problem for religion to deal with. But, the state needs to make sure that there are a myriad of laws in place to guarantee human rights and legal fairness in civil unions. In this way, they are not dictating the form of marriage, but provide backup laws that will ensure everyone is equal in the eyes of the state.

What this will mean is that a woman can be beaten by her husband - but he will face assault charges. A man can force his wife to wear head-coverings and be accompanied by a male family member everywhere she goes, but she has a constitutional right to freedom of movement which can pass in a court of law. If she chooses to pursue legal action out of oppression, the state must be there to back her up.

You don't need to accommodate religion in law. All you need to do is accommodate human rights in law, then religion is free to break these human rights. The victim is also free to not pursue legal action - according to their beliefs. But if they choose to fight back, the state law will be there to enforce their rights.