Now that SCOTUS has opined (creating a mess), friends of traditional marriage will need to defend it in the culture war, The best way to do this is to get a copy of Bill May’s booklet, Getting the Marriage Conversation Right, which has the best strategies for defending the nature of marriage. I have it already, and will no doubt need it soon.
May’s thesis, absolutely correct from the point of both history and social science, is that marriage is the only institution in existence that guarantees the rights of children to be united with their mother and father. Period. Pope Francis has said as much too many times to count. For the 4000 years marriage has existed as a social and legal institution marriage has been understood as the institution that unites a man and a woman to each other and any children born from their union. No other social structure does that.
Furthermore, the reason heterosexual marriage has enjoyed preeminence in society for 4000 years is not because of the bigotry or prejudice of the ancient pagan society that first gave marriage legal and social status. Heterosexual marriage was given priority over other relationship types common to the time (hook-ups with temple prostitutes, cohabiting, same-sex unions) because it, much more than any other relationship type, yielded several observable benefits that were necessary for the creation of an orderly society.
The first of these: Marriage unites children to their mother and father.
- Even compared to cohabiting couples, marriage comes out ahead.
- About 30% of couples who live together give up their children. It is almost unheard of for married couples to give up their children.
- Additionally, only children born in a marriage have a legal right to know who their mother and father are and to be raised by that mother and father.
- Any social movement that undercuts this fact does violence to the dignity of children.
The second: Children raised by married mothers and fathers do significantly better.
· He reality that children born to a married mother and father do better on all academic, social, psychological, spiritual, and interpersonal measures.
· Any social movement that weakens this fact does violence to the dignity of children
The third: No other relationship protects the financial and social security of women as does marriage.
· The middle-class does not exist without marriage.
· Married women are more financially and socially secure than women in any other relationship type (including lesbian relationships).
· This is true even of college-educated women (Although this group is most likely to be secure without marriage, only 37% of women have a college degree).
The fourth. Marriage socializes men.
In addition to the fact that married men are exponentially more willing to claim and raise their own children, married men are significantly less likely to commit violent crime than unmarried men.
· For example, according to the DOJ, 65% of crimes against women are committed by unmarried men.
· Only 9% of married men have committed a violent crime against a woman.
· This ratio holds up across the board for crime statistics.
The fifth: Marriage secures sustainable fertility rates.
· Even though the gap has narrowed somewhat, married couples still have more children than unmarried couples.
· De-population is the most serious social problem facing the West. As marriage rates have decreased, societies are not producing enough children to support their social infrastructure.
In sum, Gay marriage does not grant any benefits to society and in fact, undermines several:
- Gay marriage makes it discriminatory to say that ANY child has a right to a mother and father.
- Same-Sex marriage does not provide the same level of security for the partners or children raised in those households.
- Same-Sex marriage does not socialize partners to the same degree.