Why I don't believe in Gay Marriage... or oops, There Goes my Conservative Readership

Quote of the Day/Week/Millenium:

I would rather have a nod from an American, than a snuff-box from an emperor. ~Lord Byron

If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning.

About me

Name: Sian
I paint, write, and dance. Also cook vegetarian food.

Counter

visited *loading* times

Friday, 07 October 2005

Why I don't believe in Gay Marriage... or oops, There Goes my Conservative Readership

There's certainly no doubt that Gay marriage is going to be an issue in campaigns and on ballots for a while. Before you all jump down my throat, let me say that I'm a firm believer in equal protection under the law. I always have been.

As all mathematicians know, there are usually at least two ways of solving any given equation. The one which liberals prefer is to add. The conservatives, not being mathematicians, are quite comfortable with an unbalanced equation.

I would like to point out that the question isn't really whether marriage rights should be extended to gays, lesbians, bi, tri, poly and trans sexuals (please comment, if I've forgotten anyone.) The question is whether marriage remains a viable option in the twenty first century, at all.

Even a heterosexual, missionary-only-please fundamentalist can't guarantee a life-long relationship. The average marriage lasts only eight years! More than half of all marriages end in divorce, despite a contract which clearly stipulates permanence and his and hers matching dentures glasses. The contract is unenforceable!

This leads to the financial viability of the institution; following a divorce, the credit ratings of both parties are often destroyed, their assets eaten up by attorney's fees, alimony, and childsupport. During the course of the marriage, itself, the partners pay higher taxes (the marriage penalty) and in old age, their retirement income will be far less than two unmarried persons making the same income. These problems are compounded by repeated marriages and divorces.

After the divorce, each of the partners moves on to other relationships, further dividing their assets. The practice of "serial monogamy" is perverse and an affront to the very values these people claim to support.

In addition, the dissolution of marriages, child custody hearings, and vast quantities of civil protection orders which must be dealt with clog up the court system, causing inefficiency and undue expense. If all the civil matters which currently function under the aegis of "marriage" were replaced with contracts, they would reduce the expense and paperwork tremendously, both by being, in themselves, more permanent than marriage, and by being more permanently binding. Remember: no one ever ran away to Las Vegas to do a horizontal merger with stock options without a blood test.

Given the lack of success in limited trials, it is obvious that marriage will be a dismal failure in the general population. The institution is one of religion and tradition, and should be governed only by the Church, Synagogue, or Coven of the couple's choice. All governmental endorsement of marriage should be slowly phased out.