MARRIAGE MATTERS: Tom Sylvester replies to Maggie Gallagher

A GREAT MARRIAGE FAQ by Maggie Gallagher at NRO. Though I disagree with her on same-sex marriage, she nails it when writing, "If medical proxies aren't working, let's fix that problem. If people need health care, let's get them health care." (Indeed, let's get everyone health care!) The argument about "benefits" is like the tip of an iceberg. It's the most visible aspect of the public debate about gay marriage, and some people's understanding of marriage seems restricted to those 1,049 "benefits" (PDF). But the "benefits" debate ignores the vast, deep social meaning of the institution.

She also writes: "People who really cared about marriage and the suffering of fatherless children would not rewrite our marriage law to say that kids don't need fathers, and that alternative family forms are just as good as a husband and wife raising children together."

Yes, the ideal is for children to grow up with their own mother and father. But remarriage with stepchildren is legal. Current marriage laws don't state that kids need fathers. It's legal for single women to buy sperm and have radically fatherless children. Many same-sex couples raise kids and will continue to do so. Yet it is illegal for them to make the Big Commitment of marriage. Gender is important, it's not some little social construction we can ignore or do away with. But neither should it be of overriding importance.

Gallagher is also too dismissive of the lives of gays and lesbians when she describes them as "a small fraction of adults who have personal needs and problems." We all have personal needs and problems. I'm not aware of her ever sympathetically acknowledging the discrimination and ostracism gays and lesbians encounter. It's always just a dismissive reference to "personal needs and problems" of adults.

link
posted by Eve at 7:22 PM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home