Originally Posted by Prime Junta
There's a subtle distinction you may have missed: my point is that the state should stay out of the business of defining what marriage should mean subjectively and emotionally, and stick to defining what it means contractually. There's no good test for "strong emotional content," or even "intimacy and trust," so there's no point in looking for one either.
(not including lemmings, because they're anathema).
And, yes, I find that particular Islamic practice rather chilling too. But then, some people would find a tortured corpse nailed to a gibbet a somewhat chilling object of worship as well, no?