One of the recent MSN headlines read, “Will Gay Marriage Help Rescue the Economy?” The article suggests that all of the new weddings will bring an economic boost to states that allow it. Marriages are expensive, you know.
Unlike my contemporaries at SWGA Politics, I am against gay marriage. Marriage was created as an institution between a man and a woman for the protection of children, parenthood, and families. Two men in a relationship cannot make a baby. I believe that is by design. Ideally children need the influence of both a father and a mother in a family setting.
Although it is becoming more accepted, homosexuality is still a cultural taboo designed to protect the institution of marriage and family. My libertarian colleagues will argue that the state has no business in the bedroom. I agree with that. I have some homosexual friends. My sister in-law is a lesbian and we are close. I’m not a homophobe, but I do believe that legalizing gay marriage normalizes it; therefore, it will diminish the original intention of the institution. The gains in personal freedom are balanced by the loss in the value of traditional marriage.
Where does the assault on marriage end? If marriage is no longer defined as that between a man and a woman, will one man be allowed to marry two women also? Some men I know would like that. Why not? Why put the limitation on one human to one human? When does it stop? If I can get you to accept that taboo, what about one species to one species? I know some people that treat their dog better than their spouse. Maybe we can marry our dogs one day.
My libertarian friends may say that a man marrying another man will not cause them to leave their wives so it should be left to the couple. That may be so, but as gay marriage becomes normalized in the culture, the traditional family structure will crumble in the coming years.
In a 2004 article by Stanley Kurtz entitled, “The End of Marriage in Scandinavia,” Kurtz writes:
MARRIAGE IS SLOWLY DYING IN SCANDINAVIA. A majority of children in Sweden and Norway are born out of wedlock. Sixty percent of first-born children in Denmark have unmarried parents. Not coincidentally, these countries have had something close to full gay marriage for a decade or more. Same-sex marriage has locked in and reinforced an existing Scandinavian trend toward the separation of marriage and parenthood. The Nordic family pattern–including gay marriage–is spreading across Europe. And by looking closely at it we can answer the key empirical question underlying the gay marriage debate. Will same-sex marriage undermine the institution of marriage? It already has.
More precisely, it has further undermined the institution. The separation of marriage from parenthood was increasing; gay marriage has widened the separation. Out-of-wedlock birthrates were rising; gay marriage has added to the factors pushing those rates higher. Instead of encouraging a society-wide return to marriage, Scandinavian gay marriage has driven home the message that marriage itself is outdated, and that virtually any family form, including out-of-wedlock parenthood, is acceptable.
I understand that gay couples can genuinely love each other, and in those cases I could support domestic partnerships. A life partner should not be forced to sit outside of a hospital room or be denied insurance benefits, but a domestic partnership does not equal a married couple.
So now we are back to the same old conundrum. Is the moral fabric of this country worth experimenting with in the name of greater personal freedom? There could be lots of money in the gay marriage industry which would benefit small business and the taxes on all of those weddings would be great for big government. Have we evolved past traditional values in our acceptance of modern taboos?
Just so we’re clear, my own position isn’t that gay marriage should be legalized, but that government should get out of the marriage business completely.
Government should not ‘redefine’ marriage, it didn’t have any business ‘defining’ it legally to begin with.
I feel that matters of morality should be left to the individual and their God, and that government should stay out.
Those worried about the ‘moral fabric’ of the country should work through their churches, as Christ intended, and not government, which God never wanted to begin with.
After all, Christianity is about the Relationship, not the religion.
I find a fundamental flaw with the quote from Mr. Kurtz and it’s application here in the United States, namely it’s the fact that unmarried birth rates are skyrocketing without gay marriage here in the U.S.
A gay couple doesn’t affect my marriage or my interest in marriage. Frankly, it has no bearing on anyone or anything. In all truth, our culture has far, far more problems that lead to the unmarried birth rate such as a culture that has devalued marriage as a prerequisite for a family.
That said, I offered my own solution here because I agree with Jeff that government has no business in marriage whatsoever.
Furthermore, y’all may want to check out ‘Freedom of Religion‘, something I posted about a month and a half ago.