Why Marriage Matters

I've been a little busy, but I wanted to recommend Jonathan Rauch's latest book, Gay Marriage : Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America to anybody interested in the debate over same-sex marriage.  Too often I hear that advocates of same-sex marriage think marriage is only about love, and that we don't realize the importance of marriage as a social norm.  Rauch's book makes the case that SSM is necessary in order for marriage to maintain its role as a social norm.  To exclude gays and lesbians from marriage harms the institution in a couple of vital ways. 

First of all, it defines marriage by whom it excludes as opposed to what it does.  Instead of the essence of marriage being about "two people's lifelong commitment, recognized by law and by society, to care for each other", it becomes about some vague magical quality that only straight couples possess.  Most of Rauch's book explains the importance of this commitment to the couple, their children, and all of society.  For those who claim that it is SSM which would change the essence of marriage, Rauch devotes a chapter to dealing with the variety of arguments made that same-sex marriage somehow undermines the connection between marriage and children.  In fact, as I've written about frequently here, if we want to send the message that marriage is important for raising children we should be encouraging same-sex couples (many of whom are raising children) to marry.  Forbidding such marriages sends the message that marriage isn't all that important.  After all, I have been told, the parents can just make certain legal arrangements. 

The exclusion of gays and lesbians also undermines marriage in another fundamental way.  It creates alternatives to marriage like civil unions, domestic partnerships, and cohabitation.  Okay, it doesn't create cohabitation, but it has the effect of making it even more socially acceptable.  As long as gays and lesbians are denied the right to marry, more and more states and private companies will offer at least some "marital benefits" to them.  Some places the rules will require the couple to "register", other places (especially private companies) the couple will just need to cohabit.  Sometimes these programs will require the couple to take on certain responsibilities, and other times not.  And many times these programs will be available to opposite-sex couples as well.  Why should couples bother to get married, when they can get the benefits of it without the obligations?  This proliferation of alternatives, which is inevitable without same-sex marriage, violates what Rauch believes is the cardinal rule for marriage to remain normative, "If you want the benefits of marriage, get married".    

Rauch's book is well argued and well organized.  In the first two chapters he explains what marriage is for (which can be summed up well by the marriage vows) and why it needs to be universal.  The next three chapters are devoted to how gay marriage will benefit gays, straights, and marriage respectively.  The following four chapters carefully refute the arguments generally made against same-sex marriage.  If I were to give each of these arguments one word labels, they would be: procreation, polygamy, promiscuity, and precedent.  Chapter 10 explains why Rauch believes same-sex marriage should be implemented on a state-by-state basis (see my previous post ).  He concludes with a touching and personal story which captures very well the positive effect same-sex marriage could have on our culture.  Agree or disagree, at the very least opponents of same-sex marriage should respond to his arguments.

Comments

[abnormal]

Blame the parents of a murderer parents for the crime

[occupation]

Today was a loss. I just don't have anything to say. Not that it matters.

[ann]

Prejudice will always be a part of society