By: Shane Borgess
Wednesday, June 18th, 2008
It has become a regular disappointment to see the arguments supporting the redefinition of marriage in newspapers and columns offered without a cogent response. The pressure to be ‘fair’ apparently extends only to treating gays fairly, rather than the issue. I’d like to offer my thoughts on how to answer some of the dogmatic nonsense being churned out by the extreme left concerning same-sex marriage.
A snarky retort we hear so often is also the most simplistic argument - “How will gay marriage hurt your heterosexual marriage?” My answer is to ask “how will allowing polygamy or incestuous marriages hurt my marriage? ” It wouldn’t, but the effect it will have on succeeding generations will be deep and dysfunctional. If love is to be the only criterion for marriage, the courts and the state have no argument other than collective moral outrage to deny polygamists marriage rights. Since collective moral outrage wasn’t considered recently by the justices who redefined an institution thousands of years old, we should expect no deference considering their new priorities.
Other readers insist that since heterosexuals have so defiled marriage it’s hypocritical to insist it’s too reverential an institution to dilute further. Only in a world where humans are perfect could any institution survive unblemished, but because people fail to keep the standard doesn’t mean we ought to change the standard and relegate the ghost of marriage to legitimizing same- sex relationships. Countless cultures, kingdoms and nations, people both eminently wise and common throughout human history accepted gay relations as a sexual pursuit but still refused to endorse same-sex marriage. They understood why heterosexual marriage was a compelling interest. Today, the left declares all of them thoughtless bigots, and crown themselves our moral superiors.
And they’ve done a fine job cornering the market on moral superiority. They’ve anointed themselves this generation’s victims, akin to African Americans of the past marching for their civil rights. They did this so no one would challenge them under risk of being labeled the equivalent of “racist.” It has worked. But no matter how often they try to link laws against interracial marriage to laws against same-sex marriage, it doesn’t hold. The race of a person should mean nothing to society, in the case of marriage, an institution created to construct a stable environment for the begetting and raising of children, race plays no part. But gender does, and the state has a compelling interest in prioritizing heterosexual marriage because stable, mature children raised by a mother and a father are integral to the health of the culture.
Which brings us to the final point. The left brays about democracy and stolen elections, but celebrates the kidnaping and subsequent distortion of such an important institution by unelected judges - how Machiavellian. They set out to redefine marriage so it can be used to legitimize same-sex relationships and normalize the gay lifestyle. They have every right to do so, but they have no right to impose on a free people their designs. Chief Justice Ronald George disregarded the will of the people because he sought to confer dignity on his friends. In doing so he dishonored democracy and irreparably harmed the trust Californians have in the justice system. I think it’s time Californians took back their government.
A note from Radarsite: Three little words -- It's about time. --rg