“The only thing that’s killing heterosexual marriage is heterosexual marriage.”

So, I am going to the coffee shop. If you don’t know what that means, please check it out now before reading any further. Thanks 🙂 Seriously.

For a long time I have wrestled with my thoughts on The Defense of Marriage Act. While I believe in sanctity of marriage as a divined covenant with God, I also understand that my particular religious beliefs cannot be the sole argument for legislative decision-making.

The more often we come to the coffee shop, the more often you will hear that idea – my particular religious beliefs cannot be the sole argument for legislative decision-making. I have spent an awful lot of time on an awful lot of subjects applying that code.

So I considered different societal implications – children, interactions in neighborhoods, etc. I considered economical implications – tax revenues, healthcare, employee benefit packages. I considered what the unforeseen implications might be and didn’t see any – which is probably why they are still unforeseen.

And all I came up with is – it is no different from allowing a legal avenue for any other two people to marry. Any degradation of same-sex marriage – jacked up kids, crappy finances, system abuses, messy divorces – can already be found in heterosexual marriages.

Do I agree marriage is sacred? Of course I do. But many heterosexuals do not. Current divorce rates show that marriage between men and women have become disposable in roughly 50% of the cases. The is no movement to outlaw marriage between a man and a woman on the basis of mentally disturbed children, causal relationships outside of the martial bed, disinterest in the sanctity of marriage. Therefore, it is unfair to use these as barometers of a group of adults who, just as their heterosexual counterparts, are as varied in their commitment to their potential spouses.

Elisabeth Hasselbeck did a wonderful job when she said

“…to protest someone’s day I find to be without taste…The only thing that’s killing [heterosexual marriage] is heterosexual marriage.”

Some of the other women on The View said other stuff too…but, meh, Elisabeth is the only one that gets singled out here.

I understand that with my religious, conservative background, this may not be the stance expected. But these are the beliefs I currently hold. In a world so full of turmoil and discord, is this really the thing we want to fight about? With so many people unloved and bitter, are we really targeting those who have found a way to love and be loved? Do I really want to be the one to say that a hospital or jail cell or any restricted place that, “I am sorry, you are not family,” to the life partner of another person? Do I really want to be the one to say who marriage is for or who it isn’t?

Nah. I don’t think so. Do you see it different?

Leave a Reply