It would be ace if ace aces got ace rights also

In typical Lowri fashion, I have come up with yet another ace idea which would solve all of the world's problems. Well, perhaps not all of them, but it's an issue I think a lot about. I have written before on the world's obsession with gay marriage, and I would like to propose a new three-type system (which would definitely NOT be tiers, as all would get the same legal rights) to deal with different requirements, while also clarifying some things I have previously argued.
I would first like to propose that the institution of marriage is the largest and most standardised of the three proposed classifications and would continue to be recognised by the Church. Under my definition, marriage would remain a romantic and physical bond between a man and a woman for the purposes of lifelong companionship and procreation where applicable (not everybody wants, or is able to have, kids). Simples.
I would like to continue by clarifying that while I do not support gay "marriage", this does not mean I'm homophobic or anti-gay. I personally believe that as a Christian I am called to love everybody equally (or rather, despise everybody equally as I am too flawed to love everybody - I make no secret of the fact that I am no messiah yet I am not particularly proud of my cynicism, however large a chunk of my personality I permit it to comprise) and to leave any and all judgement to God. I fully appreciate that being gay is not a choice and as such I do not think gays ought to be denied the legal rights an heterosexual couple would receive by being married. However, I do not think it would be correct to refer to such a legal partnership as marriage as the term "marriage" has always meant the joining of a man and woman in the eyes of the Church, and historically procreation. Seeing as many in the Church may not be willing to recognise such a partnership and procreation is definitely not a possibility, I think it would be a better idea to stick with the system currently in use in the UK which offers "civil partnerships" which carry the same legal rights as marriage and give gays the option to form a romantic companionship with another person in the eyes of the law.
Finally, I would like to propose a third option for a different group entirely: asexuals. The asexual community is one I definitely think is underrepresented as a whole, and there really isn't a lot done for asexuals besides mocking/ignoring/ignorantly contradicting us. The third option is one I like to refer to as platonic companionship, for those who either just have no interest in traditional marriage or civil partnership, such as the aforementioned ace community, particularly the aromantic ones, or even groups such as childless widows/widowers with no wish to be married again who could join up platonically with friends or relatives for the legal benefits of marriage, such as next-of-kinship et cetera. Obviously, this platonic companionship can be between a same-sex or opposite-sex pair and would be fully dissolvable in the instance of one or both parties wishing to marry or enter into a civil partnership with somebody else, and if both parties wished it the companionship could at any point be redefined into marriage or a civil partnership, provided the legal criteria for either have been met (for example it would not be possible for a brother and sister to upgrade to marriage as that would be illegal and SERIOUSLY squicky).
(Quick disclaimer: obviously not all asexuals are also aromantic, and those who are demiromantic, heteroromantic, homoromantic or anywhere else on the romantic scale would be applicable for marriage or civil partnership instead if they wanted one. I'm just pointing out that there almost certainly those of us aces who would be happier having an easy non-romantic option if they wanted the legal perks, which they would be quite right to, or to demiromantics who might take a very long time to build up a romantic relationship who could upgrade later on.)
Well, I honestly don't see how anything I have proposed could have offended anybody at all (which makes a change, I have to say) and I think the idea particularly of platonic companionships is a rather brilliant one. Equal rights campaigners, get on this! If nothing else, a platonic companionship would be perfect for shippers of the Sherlock/John bromance, which coincidentally is a completely perfect example of when a PC would be utterly appropriate.