Absolutely not! But it should be an option
Some couples have based their marriage OFF the Marriage Act.
Some LGBTI peoples’ life’s work is on campaigning for equal recognition on the Marriage Act.
I think that we need to respect that some people want government as much as some people don’t.
At the end of the day we are a political party trying to make change in Government, not to dismantle it. That is Anarchism.
And dismantling one Act completely, compared to reforming it, would make zero difference in dismantling government. There are thousands more Acts where that came from.
We also have to be realistic that Pirate Party are not going to win government anytime soon (unfortunately) and get that policy through, so Libertarian Ideals need to be weighed up against Practical Reality.
Also it makes us look like really bad to people who aren’t hardcore Libertarians.
I am not opposed to the principle of dismantling needless regulation but this is not one of them. If it was reformed there would be barely any regulation (only who who gets to put the word “Church of Christ” on their Certificate) and no requirement to use it. In fact if a fair chunk of the population was against it (i.e. The Church) that would be a benefit to change the status quo that Legal Marriages under the Marriage Act must be entered into, and bring attention to it being optional. In effect, psychologically returning the effect of marriage to the people and the religion they choose to subscribe to.
As a compromise solution I would not be against putting in Grandfather and Sunset clause into the Marriage Act… let same-sex and intersex people get married for X years just like everyone else has been allowed to for the past 56 years, and then close off the Marriage registrar to new registrations.