Fighting the Wrong Fight

My thoughts on so-called "gay marriage."

I have no problem with what arrangements people want to make for themselves, so that property is managed, significant others are recognized as such. So in that regard, civil unions is a no-brainer.

I am uncomfortable with an amendment to cast in stone a Christian definition of marriage, in a government which claims to welcome all ideas and peoples, including, non-Christians. In this regard, the best solution would be to take marriage entirely out of the hands of the state, give it entirely over to the churches, and leave in the state's hands only the civil union for all. Marriages would refer to the religious understanding, the civil union would refer to the state's understanding. Churches would regulate marriage, the state unions.

Social conservatives do have a point, however. The social understanding of the institution is critical because of the effect it has on children. The arrangements for raising children; for teaching children what is normal, or ideal, or functional; for giving children the best chance for a happy life is at stake. There is no one right way to raise children, and no ideal of companionate marriage should be imposed. Likewise, the traditional system is based on a wealth of experience and should not be cast aside for an alternate ideal of some "new definition of family." These issues should be promulgated by families, schools, churches, and communities in cooperation.

But, these institutions are not in cooperation. Social conservatives argue that judges take no account of the traditional understanding of the laws or customs of marriage, and push a radical agenda. That they do so trumping legislatures is troubling. Judicial oligarchy. Social conservatives argue that schools will take the most radical models of family and project them as normal. Anyone who has seen what schools have done with models of family to date will appreciate the potential for school-as-social-engineer.

The problem isn't that somewhere a gay couple wants to legally identify itself as a couple, nor is it that somewhere a social worker might find such a couple to be parents suitable for adoption. The problem is that no matter where Americans want to set the standard, radical judges will force a shift to the left, and that public schools will promulgate the most radical interpretation of the family. The problem isn't a gay couple looking for legal protections, the problems are our radical judges and public schools. That's where the efforts would be better spent.