Defense of Marriage

[minn_stat]

In his thread on the "Irrelevance of Choice in Gay Marriage", BlueHair said:

Originally Posted by BlueHair

...

Seriously, I have no problem with you wanting to keep the "social norms" the way they are. Everyone is free to think the way they want. I also have no problem with churches preaching against homosexuality. I think legislating against it goes too far. Since allowing gays to marry wouldn't cause any harm to heterosexual marriage, I can't see why it shouldn't be allowed.

I disagree. There have been several threads recently on homosexuality in general and gay marriage in particular. I lurk around, reading much of it, but rarely finding the time to reply. But since not many others are representing the "against gay marriage" side of things, I'm going to do so. This will be pretty long, because I'm not very good at the one-liners so many of you are good at. Or maybe it just takes time to lay out some of the issues involved. But I actually feel this is a pretty important issue.

The mainstream media has done a horrible job informing us of the issues involved. Instead of providing us a reasonably balanced view of the pros and cons, they have become advocates for the homosexual agenda. They have been almost unanimous in decrying actions such as the DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) of 2006 as unnecessary, as an incursion of state’s rights, and as an unprecedented attempt to single out a group to be denied basic civil rights. The cacophony is just about deafening, and it can become very easy to be swayed by the repeated media phrases, with nary of word of opposing views, except to portray them as discriminatory, hate-filled desires of close-minded bigots. Why not a fair, reasonable portrayal of both sides?

Note that most of the experts I will be citing are not LDS, and in fact, several are openly gay or are proponents of gay marriage. I will refrain from explicit religious arguments against gay marriage.

Let us begin with examining the purpose of marriage within the context of government. Why should government be involved at all in marriage? Why did it get involved in the first place? This involvement arises because the government has a strong interest in preserving society, in ensuring its own survival, so to speak. And this is achieved by promoting institutions which nurture and educate the next generation of society – families and schools, in particular. Let me reiterate this key point – it is in society’s (and government’s) best interest to preserve itself by promoting institutions that protect, nurture, and prepare children to be the next generation of society. To do otherwise is short-sighted at best; it is self-destructive from a societal point of view, and it is narcissistic in the extreme for individuals to seek to destroy those institutions without providing alternatives to protect society’s interest. “My wants exceed the needs of the composite individuals in the larger society” is a pretty simplified picture, but strongly illustrates the narcissism that I am referring to here.