Thursday, December 4, 2008

Misplaced Assumptions in the Marriage Debate . . .

. . . which should be set aside, if gay marriage advocates truly wish to try to change the minds of those who are traditional marriage advocates.

1. An individual has the inherent right to marry whomever they want.
I simply don't believe it. I don't think people should be allowed to marry close family members, for example. Even though there is no rational reason for feeling this way, I just do. Gay marriage advocates would be better off trying to explain why the right to marry the same gender ought to be allowed, beyond a simple "cause we want to".

2. Genetic traits excuse behavior.
There is a plethora of genetic traits that lead to unacceptable behavior. Schizophrenia and other mental disorders come to mind. Advocates would be better off getting away from an appeal of "I can't help it," to explaining why the behavior should be normalized.

3. Animal behavior is a good role model for human behavior.
Animals do a lot of things I don't think humans should do, ranging from eating their own young to rape, not to mention sniffing behinds as a greeting. I would advise refraining from comparing oneself to an animal in this sense. It isn't really a flattering analogy.

4. That any minority desire must be allowed or it is majority tyranny.
Again, I don't believe it. There is a minority of people who believe they have the right to child pornography. That doesn't mean it should be allowed. Whether people like it or not, democracy is by definition a tyranny of the majority. Better that than tyranny of one, such as an absolute monarchy. Rather than whining that it isn't fair, advocates really ought to demonstrate why the minority desire is beneficial to society.

To be fair, some advocates have done this. I'm not writing this post for them, I'm writing it to those who believe that it is worth repeating something loudly and often enough to drown out anything anyone else might say, whether or not it matters.

What I find compelling is a reasonable, measured, calm exposition of why this is beneficial to me, personally, and to society as a whole. Calling me a bigot and hate-filled really doesn't accomplish the goal, unless the goal is to cement me more firmly in my opinion.


  1. This is so well-worded. I haven't blogged about this subject because I don't (yet) know how to remain objective enough to write a "reasonable, measured, calm exposition..." You compellingly said what I wish I could say. Thanks.

  2. One reason I support SSM marriage is that it promotes marriage. Marriage is a stabilizing force in our society and should be encouraged and rewarded. We should enable those who choose to make long term martial commitments rather than transitory ones. We do this now for men and women who want to marry but why not encourage people of the same gender t to marry. I believe it will result in more societal stability and that all people, both gay and straight, will benefit as a result. So in that sense, I am being selfish. I believe that SSM will benefit me even though I am in long term committed heterosexual marriage.

  3. This is a great blog. Keep up the good work! I'll be checking back and forth for updates! God bless!

  4. Sanford—I suppose it depends on what you think marriage is. Marriage can be a stabilizing force in society, unless its definition is so changed that it little resembles the institution which God established. Marriage is already suffering from this change in definition with the prevalence of divorce and marital abuse. Some feel that expanding its definition further will only serve to weaken marriage itself, denuding it of its ability to stabilize society.


Unfortunately, I've found it necessary to screen comments. Unless your comment violates the commenting policy, it will show up as soon as I can approve it.

Popular Posts