In the July 2, 2013 edition of the Herald-Tribune, statehouse reporter Maureen Hayden wonders how her brother’s recent same sex marriage undermines traditional marriage. Her question is valid, but the problem with this emotion-based argument is that it disregards the purpose of marriage. Historically, marriage has been less about the desires of the adults and more about the children who result. That is why government has a vested interest in recognizing and protecting traditional marriage. The traditional structure ensures a thriving civilization by providing the best environment for raising children to be contributing members of society.
Not every biological parent is a good parent, nor is every same sex parent a bad parent. However, the evidence is overwhelming that the ideal is for children to be raised by a mother and a father committed to one another in marriage. The more that structure is eroded and discouraged through such things as no-fault divorce, cultural approval of out-of-wedlock pregnancies, and attempts to redefine marriage, the more our children suffer. How? Because children raised outside the traditional structure are far more likely to live in poverty, struggle academically, spend time in prison, and suffer from mental illness. That includes children raised in same sex households (see “A Social Experiment Without Science Behind It”, Nelson Lund, Wall Street Journal, March 26, 2013, www.wsj.com ). There are exceptions, but not enough to attempt a redefinition of a structure that has stood the test of time.
It may not be politically correct to question legalizing same sex marriage. But if we truly believe “it’s about the children”, then maybe we should put their needs ahead of the desires of adults and reconsider the rush to redefine marriage.
Batesville Christian Church