Wednesday, March 03, 2004

The Best Argument for Same-Sex Marriage Yet

Tim Cavanaugh has a truly revolutionary idea on marriage. Have the government get the hell out of the marriage management business. Hey, I said something similar here. expansion of marriage opportunities would raise valuable dilemmas, the solutions to which may well involve devolution of government interference in the private sector. If it's unreasonable to expect a boss to insure multiple spouses, why is it reasonable when we force her to insure just one? Single people already subsidize their married co-workers and fellow taxpayers in numerous ways; perhaps it's worth reconsidering the social engineering arguments that created this situation. Maybe it's even worth taking another look at the "family reunification" goals of the 1965 Immigration Act. Up until now, we've been content with a vast range of marriage-related governmental intrusions. Gay marriage calls many of them into question. I have no love for [San Francisco Mayor] Gavin Newsom ... but he may inadvertently be steering us toward a truly private definition of marriage.

So far, proponents of same-sex marriage have been content to make mutually exclusive arguments: that gay marriage is no big deal and that it is vitally important. They should be more courageous in their assertions: Gay marriage could well destroy the civic institution of marriage that has been defined by more than a century of governmental tinkering. That's the best argument for it I've heard yet.

Name one "alternative lifestyle" that has done more real, tangible damage to marriage than the well-intentioned government programs and incentives that have tried to financially bolster it.

Be honest now...

UPDATE: Cedar has an observation.


Post a Comment

<< Home