Marriage is based on the truth that men and women are complementary, the biological fact that reproduction depends on a man and a woman, and the reality that children need a mother and a father. Redefining marriage does not simply expand the existing understanding of marriage; it rejects these truths. Marriage is society’s least restrictive means of ensuring the well-being of children. By encouraging the norms of marriage—monogamy, sexual exclusivity, and permanence—the state strengthens civil society and reduces its own role. The future of this country depends on the future of marriage. The future of marriage depends on citizens understanding what it is and why it matters and demanding that government policies support, not undermine, true marriage.
At the heart of the current debates about same-sex marriage are three crucial questions: What is marriage, why does marriage matter for public policy, and what would be the consequences of redefining marriage to exclude sexual complementarity?
Marriage exists to bring a man and a woman together as husband and wife to be father and mother to any children their union produces. It is based on the anthropological truth that men and women are different and complementary, the biological fact that reproduction depends on a man and a woman, and the social reality that children need both a mother and a father. Marriage predates government. It is the fundamental building block of all human civilization. Marriage has public purposes that transcend its private purposes. This is why 41 states, with good reason, affirm that marriage is between a man and a woman. (NOTE: This number has since been reduced to 33 with same-sex marriage now legal in 17 states).
Government recognizes marriage because it is an institution that benefits society in a way that no other relationship does. Marriage is society’s least restrictive means of ensuring the well-being of children. State recognition of marriage protects children by encouraging men and women to commit to each other and take responsibility for their children. While respecting everyone’s liberty, government rightly recognizes, protects, and promotes marriage as the ideal institution for childbearing and childrearing.
1 Comment. Leave new
The discussion above does a great job of describing the inescapable good results which occur when the scriptural definition of marriage is observed and accepted, especially those who follow the biblical precepts of the marriage contract. Is it possible that there may be a simpler and more compelling way to view these issues which are on the table at this time?
The Holy Bible contains the witness and details of the Created World, with the description, naming and defining of all operational capabilities of that Created World and with the description of the Creation of all living creatures which are animated by God’s Breath of Life, breathed into the original Created Man and Woman, and gifted, among other things, with the privilege and blessing of procreation, and with the ability to understand and communicate the reality, presence, actions and purposes prescribed the Creator God, and for which capabilities the Created Man and Woman are forever indebted.
Part and parcel of these defined capabilities and operations was the naming, description and definition of the approved nature and purposes of the responsibilities, and benefits, of the relationship between the Created Man and Woman, including the naming of the contractual relationship accompanying the pleasure and results of procreation “marriage”.
In short, this definition of marriage is a fundamental, holy and sanctified part of the understanding of the instructions and responsibilities of this divine contract. Thus for those who put their faith and certainty in the reality and holiness of the Eternal Triune God, the failure of those who wish to redefine and use the word “marriage” for a contract for other than a man and a woman results in blasphemy against the source and reason of life and existence.
This practice of using the word marriage for other than the joining of one man and one woman under the eye of the Ever-Present God is usually practiced by those who claim “There is no God”. Thus, it is ironic that the twisting of use of the word marriage is corrupted for a use never intended, and since there is no God, according to the usual perpetrators of such a situation, it is fitting that this misuse of the word “marriage” winds up, literally, to be totally without meaning or significance.