There are many serious issues facing our country today, the economy, energy, and the war with the Islamofacist. But on May 15th the California Supreme Court has pushed another issue to the fore-front of national attention, gay marriage. So just what does marriage mean and why is this such a big issue? To properly define marriage you need to look at three different areas; marriage in terms of legal matters, marriage in terms of social impact, and marriage in terms of spiritual matters. The California Supreme Court ruling covers the first two conditions which tend to blur together. Obviously the courts are not equipped to handle the third.

Legal considerations of marriage:

The first attempts by Gay pressure groups to legalize gay marriages was based on the fact that gay partners did not have the same rights as married couples and that this constituted discrimination. Examples that were given included the right to enroll their partner in their companies health care program,the right to get health care information about their partner, and the right to make health care decisions for their partner. Most of these concerns can be addressed by setting up legal agreements beforehand. Domestic partner laws have been created to provide similar rights as traditional married couples.

The equality of these laws came into question In the California Supreme Court case.  The judges in the case asked if the domestic partners did not give domestic partners equal rights. The attorney supporting gay marriage responded, "this case is not about whether the domestic partnership laws are fair or equal, but whether to denying marriage to lesbians and gays is equal." So it seems that the legal aspects of marriage can be adequately addressed by domestic partner laws and other legal means. From the arguments presented by the attorney for Gay Marriage, it would seem like the Gay argument is more a societal issue than a legal one.

Societal consideration of marriage: 

If you have been around long enough, you can see how the debate about homosexuality has changed in society. At one time it was about whether homosexual behavior should be repressed or not. The argument back then was that Homosexuals just wanted to be left in peace. They did not want to live in fear of attacks or lose their jobs because of their sexual orientation. They won the argument and laws were put into place to protect the homosexual community.

Then the argument changed. No longer was it about being protected from persecution. Now the argument has turned to acceptance. Just as the attorney implied in arguing for gay marriage. Now the homosexual agenda is about promoting their life style and forcing their values onto a population that for the most part finds it objectionable. Pursuing their need to have their lifestyle accepted by an unwillinging majority will cause a big shift in our society. But is this change for better or worse? What are the unintended consequences of this kind of a change?

This is the question that really needs to be asked. Because homosexual marriages will have other affects on our society far beyond the affect it will have for their small community.  I read an article in favor of gay marriage that brought up an interesting point. I wish that I had the full article to link to but unfortunately I lost the link. so I'll have to paraphrase. Basically the article talked about relations and the impact of marriage on relations. This is an interesting point. If you are married to a person you become their relative and that creates a certain legal and social bond that a domestic partner doesn't have.

Imagine a traditional couple with a gay son or daughter. Depending on the beliefs of the couple, having a gay child can create quite a strain on the families relations. Now imagine that the son or daughter marries their partner. By the traditions of our society, the gay partner is now a relative. How will this affect society? What strains will this put on people who do not accept the gay lifestyle? In essence, the parents will be forced to accept this new gay relationship or break off all relations with their own child. This is a case where liberal moral value is being forced upon an unwilling public by the courts. Isn't that what liberals claim to fight against? Is this progress? Would this make our society a better place? I can see how the gay community would want to force this upon society. It would help them to feel better about themselves; help them to feel better accepted. 

I also wonder about the unintended consequences of promoting the gay lifestyle. Part of this goes back to the debate of the origins of homosexuality. The gay community wants to promote the idea that it is unavoidable, and quite possibly genetic.  It is understandable that they would believe this and want to prove it as fact. But is it fact?  Humans as a whole are not ruled by instincts as much as other animals. 

Most of our behavior is learned although the basic hormonal instincts for reproduction are built into all of us, there are many cultural variations; such as what constitutes beauty and sexual attraction.  But even with these cultural variances, the vast majority of sexual relations involve men and women. The phenomenon of homosexuality where a member of one sex is not sexually aroused by the other sex is rather rare. It is possible that homosexuality is more of a behavioral issue than a genetic one. As such, it could be compared to nymphomania, pedophilia, or bestiality.  Indeed when you look at Pedophiles, they seem to be unable to control their sexual appetites even when they face severe prison terms for their behavior.  Is that so different from homosexuality? It is all about satisfying one's sexual appetite. So how far should society bend in order to accommodate the desires of this community? What social norms should be discarded? What role does marriage play in promoting a stable society and how will this change?

I believe the potential for harm comes in the overly aggressive teaching of homosexuality to adolescents. Puberty is a difficult and awkward journey.  Many young adults at this time find it difficult to relate to the opposite sex even though they want to. But with a heavy emphasize on gay relations, now they have an out. Instead of being forced to grow outside of their comfort zone and learn to deal with the opposite sex, especially in regards to intimate relations; they can retreat to the comfort of their own sex and still satisfy their sexual urges. This kind of behavior would be beneficial to the gay community because it has the potential of increasing the gay population. But I believe that this would only serve to further strain relations between the sexes. Similar to how the Feminist movement tore apart traditional sexual roles in our society. 

Breaking down the traditional roles of the sexes without really putting anything in it's place has caused some strain in the relations between the sexes as people try to develop a new norm.  I think something similar is happening with the promotion of homosexuality. It is breaking down the barriers and taboos of our society and leaving nothing to replace it.  Just a free for all of self indulgence that in the long run cannot be good.

Spiritual consideration of marriage: 

The spiritual union of marriage is reflected in the religious teachings where marriage is the union of a man and a women. In more metaphysical terms this union creates a new spiritual entity by joining the masculine and feminine energy.  It is the balance of Yin and Yang, the Alchemical Wedding. This is my problem with gay marriages. Where is the balance? Where is the joining of the divine male energy with the divine female? Although many people fail in creating a truly spiritual marriage, the real goal in a marriage is to reach this higher spiritual state.

Can that state be achieved with the joining of two males or two females? No there will be something missing. They may be devoted couples, they may even stay together for life creating a lasting friendship but it will never be a spiritual marriage. Of course this idea of a spiritual marriage will be rejected by the secular progressive community that rejects any notion that there may be something bigger then our physical existence.

So what is marriage? A complicated blend of traditional roles, familial relations, societal norms, and legal obligations all wrapped up in a spiritual journey. You can grant gay couples the legal rights without affecting the familial and societal norms, or you can throw out the societal norms and see what develops in their place by granting gay couples the right to become, "married." But just because a judge declares that it is unfair to prevent gay couples from calling themselves married does not mean that they will journey down the same path as a man and a woman will. They can adopt children, or be artificially impregnated in order to create a family but it is not the same as a family that is a blend of masculine and feminine energy. The children will not experience the same dynamics when they have two mommies or two daddies. No matter what rules the courts will impose on society, gay couples cannot achieve the same spiritual union as a married man and woman.  

 - Thomas Paine 2

Technorati Tags: Gay Marriage, Politics, Society, Marriage