Marriage and politics

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

By Bob Stuart

Our nation is divided over gay marriage. Several states have sanctioned it, some are considering it, and many prohibit it. All eyes look to government for answers. I believe this is a mistake. Rather than intervening, government should divorce itself from marriage ??? specifically, from defining, sanctioning, and subsidizing it.

Attempting to define marriage is a lose-lose situation for government. If it upholds the traditional view that marriage is the legal union of a man and woman (and subsidizes those marriages with tax breaks), it offends and discriminates against a minority.

If government redefines marriage to include same-sex couples, it offends and creates conflicts with traditional churches and their members. Their religious definition of marriage would be threatened and nullified by government. And this would be unfair to the majority, who adhere to the traditional belief.

The answer is for government to butt out, and let marriage be a private concern between couples, their friends, family and churches. That especially means no government benefits for married couples. Its role should be restricted to resolving property issues and other contractual matters.

If two gay individuals want to be married, fine, let it be so. It’s their business, and believers in traditional marriage should not feel threatened. They can remain confident and secure in their beliefs, while being respectful and tolerant toward others. Most importantly, their beliefs will not be at odds with their government.
There are other issues that would need to be dealt with, like the state’s role in protecting children. But the basic thrust should be as little government involvement in marriage as possible.

Obviously, this arrangement wouldn’t end differences of opinion in the marriage debate. Both sides are entitled to their core beliefs, and should not be expected to change them. A struggle for hearts and minds would continue, which is proper in a free society.

Our First Amendment rights of free exercise of religion and freedom of speech must be protected in this context. Both sides may find offense in the views of the other, but need to respectfully disagree. That’s one of the costs and blessings of freedom.
Freedom demands less government interference in our lives. We have a right to choose in the free market of faiths, ideologies, and lifestyles – so long as our choices don’t harm others.

The church and believers in traditional marriage don’t need government aid in promoting their view, and should not be subject to a government that will define or re-define their original ideology and traditions.

Prohibition of gay marriage should end by removing the issue from the political arena, making marriage a matter of personal choice and conscience. As long as it’s a political battle waged in our courts and legislatures, the issue will divide America. PJH


PERMALINK:
Marriage and politics | Planet JH News Article: Right Wing Local

Leave a Comment