To purchase the entire DVD set of the Summit Lecture Series, visit summit.org.
Andrew Sullivan, perhaps one of the most prominent advocates for same-sex marriage said in 1996:
“If nothing else were done at all and gay marriage were legalized, 90% of the political work necessary to achieve gay and lesbian equality will have been achieved. It’s ultimately the only reform that matters.”
In other words, once gay marriage is put into place, or the government promotes same-sex marriage, homosexuality is considered on par with heterosexuality. And then the force of the law will be used against those who disagree to comply.
So, as I said in our earlier post, the debate is really about validation and normalization.
And I don’t blame them for this one bit. I actually very much relate and can see that side of the argument clearly.
I had a friend – we grew up together in New Jersey – who was gay. We buried him at the age of 36 – dead from AIDS. And nobody ever said to him, “Mark, you know… you probably shouldn’t be doing this.” Everyone just said, “I want to be loving. I want to be tolerant.”
I think that’s cowardly.
I think sometimes you need to tell people what they need to hear, even if they get angry with you.
This brings me to the first of the “Four P’s” which will help in any discussion regarding gay marriage. The first “P” is “Purpose”.
For what PURPOSE does the government promote marriage between a man and a woman?
It is NOT because two people love one another. This is NOT why the State endorses marriage.
The reason why the State promotes marriage is because of many benefits: It creates children; it raises children by a mother and father, which is known to be best for the children and society; it civilizes men and focuses them on productive pursuits; it protects women from uncommitted men; and it perpetuates and stabilizes society.
In fact, there would be no society if men and women didn’t come together, and there certainly wouldn’t be a civilized society if men and women didn’t come together and stay together for the benefit of their children. We’ve already seen in the past 40-50 years a breakdown of the family at amazing rates, which has led to all sorts of other problems in our society. This is one reason why you cannot bifurcate the financial and moral issues of our culture. When the family breaks down (a moral issue), the government bloats to such an extreme and deficit spending takes over (a financial issue) which leads to increased welfare, crime, poverty and other social issues that create incredible strain on the economy.
You can’t separate or divide moral issues and societal, especially economic, issues.
So, the reason why the government has historically promoted marriage between one man and one woman is because it gets great benefits. When our marriages are strong, our country is strong. When our marriages are weak, our country is weak.
So, then someone might ask, “How can you say that no one’s civil rights are denied by saying that traditional marriage is the only relationship worthy of promotion?”
Well, let’s look at it this way: The government has three options when it comes to any behavior. The government can either –
- Prohibit a behavior.
- Permit a behavior.
- Promote a behavior.
When the government promotes marriage between a man and a woman, it gives those married couples special financial benefits, rights, and special treatment under the law because society receives great benefits from that relationship.
On the other hand, some relationships are prohibited (polygamy, incest and pedophilia to name a few). These relationships are actually detrimental to society.
When the government permits certain relationships, such as unmarried heterosexual relationships and same-sex relationships, it neither promotes NOR prohibits the act. Therefore no person is being discriminated against. Everybody has the same equal right. Everybody has the right to engage in the promoted and permitted relationships, if they want to. Whether or not they choose to get married, so long as it is not prohibited, it is their choice.
No one is denying anybody their rights.
You see, these are all behaviors, they are not people.
Laws address behaviors, they don’t address persons. Laws say “This behavior is a behavior that is beneficial, therefore we will promote it. These other behaviors are behaviors that are fine and permitted. These final behaviors are harmful and we will prohibit them.”
They do not discriminate against any person or individual.
In fact, the reason we need laws is because people behave in ways that are harmful to others and so some behaviors are prohibited.