 |
||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||
Family Reunion
The case against the case against gay marriage.
Blankenhorn may think this project futile. He is right to sound cautionary notes. But in recent years, as he points out, U.S. divorce rates have dropped a little and teen-pregnancy rates have dropped a lot, while “rates of marital happiness have stabilized and may be increasing.” States are experimenting with reforms to strengthen marriage and reduce unnecessary divorce, and the proportion of African-American children living in two-parent, married-couple homes has stabilized or increased. Those modest but heartening improvements come at precisely the time when gay Americans in the millions–the ordinary folks, not the academicians–have discovered and embraced marriage and family after years of alienation from both.
Blankenhorn and I could argue all day about whether gay marriage is
part of the solution or part of the problem. But I feel I have learned
a couple of things recently. From giving all those speeches, I have
learned that the public takes a more individualistic view of marriage
than either Blankenhorn or I would prefer. From his new book, I’ve
learned that the public’s view of both marriage and society is
nonetheless richer, wiser, and more humane than David Blankenhorn’s–and
possibly, for that matter, than my own. Which gives me hope that,
whatever the experts say the real purpose of marriage is or is not, the
public can ultimately get it right.
Nowhere in this review do I read arguments about whether national governments should concern themselves with "marriage." Until the rise of the national state, marriage was a private institution, and the entire debate about gay marriage could be completely sidestepped by returning marriage to its private roots, and leaving governments to regulate only civil unions, gay, straight, non-romantic, etc. Government doesn't turn our religious feelings into statutes; it should do the same with our love lives. No one in this debate seems to stop and ask why does the state compel two individuals to state their love for each other before granting them a license to form a union. Any two individuals should be granted a civil union license, something that would have all the romance of getting a driving license or a property title, and leave the "till death do us part" stuff to religion, where it belongs.
Jun 11, 2007, 6:44 AMWell said.
Jun 12, 2007, 8:32 AMThe day marriage is privatized is the day the culture war over gay marriage will end.
Jun 13, 2007, 2:02 AMPost a Comment
Jonathan Rauch is a senior writer for National Journal and a guest scholar at the Brookings Institution. His latest book is Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America.
Events
Democracy, Brennan Center Co-Host Money-in-Politics Event
On May 7, the Brennan Center for Justice, a New York City-based public policy institute, hosted a panel discussion co-sponsored by Democracy and Demos on money in politics, the subject of Democracy’s centerpiece symposium in the Winter 2013 issue.
News
Washington Post Interviews Kleiman on Crime Policy
In a March 28 post in The Washington Post’s Wonkblog, Dylan Matthews interviewed UCLA professor Mark Kleiman about his essay, “Smart on Crime,” in the current issue of Democracy.
News
Klein Cites Democracy Essay on Defense Spending
In his Bloomberg View column on February 13, Ezra Klein discussed the politics of military spending and highlighted a number of quotes from former Representative Barney Frank’s feature contribution to Democracy’s Winter 2013 issue.
