Gay Marriage: An Analysis

I'd like to start by getting some facts straight. For both sides. I feel that oftentimes this can be at the heart of pointless contentions, so these things need to be cleared up.

1. Being gay is not a black-and-white feeling.
There's a spectrum. A person can either have strong feelings towards those of the opposite gender or those of the same gender- but they could also have very mild feelings one way or the other- or mild feelings one way and strong feelings the other- or they could have a strong attraction to both genders. There are people in each of these categories.

2. There are people who are *born gay*.
Gay behavior in humans has been around at least as long as civilization, and gay behavior in animals is present across a vast number of species. One can only rationally conclude that despite gays being unable to reproduce, genes play a role in whether or not someone is gay.

3. There are people who are gay without being born that way.
Identical twin studies show that while there is a correlation, it is not always the case that both have the same sexual orientation. Therefore, personal experience plays a role in the determining of whether or not someone is gay, at least in some cases.

4. Marriage is not a right.
It's a privilege- and there's a very important distinction. Wanting something- or even needing something- does not give you the right to have that something. If I had the right to a trip to Disney World, I would have used it by now, and if I had the right to food, I wouldn't need to buy it from the grocery store. Likewise, the status of marriage entails certain benefits, which do not fall under the category of "rights" for any two people who decide they want them.

5. This is not semantics.
The debate of whether or not gays should be allowed marital status is not merely an issue of the definition of marriage- it's much more than that. Being married entails social, legal and monetary benefits, which symbolize society's condoning of a relationship.

+++

When people take a first glance at the issue of gay marriage, I'm tempted to say that they usually don't look any closer than that- a glance. Some will consider it a flat-out lack of equality, or even attribute it to slavery, others will find the notion disturbing, or perhaps in conflict with their faith, and discount the idea for those reasons alone. On both ends, I think there's more to be seen. Let me go over some popular arguments:
--
Consider first the argument: "So long as they mind their own business, I can mind mine. Let them call it marriage, it's all the same, right?"

Wrong. Once again- this is not semantics. Whether or not a group of two people is granted marital status is the difference between society granting it's approval or disapproval of the union, and that says a lot about our culture. Very few people actually would contend with the point that they can't simply mind their own business- that's what America's all about, and that *is* a right. But the transition from "mind your own business" to "go ahead and get married" is, while perhaps subtle, a significant transition indeed.
--
Consider now a second argument: "If two people are happy and love each other- they should be just as accepted in society as an old-fashioned married couple. Man and a man or man and a woman- they're still two people- and if they want to get married they should be able to do that for themselves."

I think the follow-up questions should be asked: What of two siblings? What of a 60 year old man and a 9 year old boy? It's two people- and they're in love- so what's to stop them from being married? How about a man and two women? Why can marriage be all inclusive to any two people, but not any 3 people? Or 6 or 7 people? At some point- call it discrimination if you will- no one is going to be comfortable condoning certain kinds of relationships, and they probably shouldn't. The examples I provided are both disturbing and problematic, and evidence has shown that individuals involved in these sorts of relationships lead very troubled, and perhaps troubling, lives.

Societies that practice polygamy, for example, have women shortages- which can lead to serious rioting issues and can serve as an intense incentive to leave the country, or region, to find love elsewhere. The United States medical community openly recognizes pedophilia as a psychiatric disorder-- as do law enforcement officials. Pedophiles are far more likely to participate in a wide array of criminal activity, and far less likely to be productive, functioning members of society. I have no doubt that should a relationship ever be permitted, heaven forbid, between a pedophile and a child, it would be disastrously unhealthy for the child. It is undoubtedly an undesirable thing to occur.

In these cases, America, and most of the rest of the civilized world, has chosen to make these relationships illegal-- arguably the removal of actual rights. Interesting how these people are never spoken up for by this group of arguers.

I make this point because research suggests that gay relationships often have similar sorts of issues. Gays are more likely to contract sexually-transmitted disease, more likely to attempt suicide, more likely to experience depression, more likely to abuse drugs, more likely to be criminals and less likely to be as productive as other people in straight relationships.

The question becomes- in the one direction- at what point does the relationship become so harmful to society that you make it illegal? And in the other direction- at what point does the relationship become beneficial enough to be condoned and formally appreciated by society? I would argue that gay relationships lie somewhere in between.
--
Should the government be a part of this? Probably not, no.

Whether you're straight or gay, and regardless of what kind of relationship you want to have with a partner, the law should stay out of the picture as far as ascribing a legal status of marriage. Involving the government in such matters (almost any matters, really) can only do harm.

In this case however, the government is doing a very small amount of harm by ascribing a legal status. Yes, there are some benefits the government dishes out, but those are relatively small in number and minor in significance. What's more important is the cultural meaning behind the term "marriage", and how that impacts people within society.

Without doubt, marriage is a "good" thing in the eyes of most people. If you are "married" to another person, people will appreciate you and give you gifts and celebrate and recognize you for an accomplishment. This is all encouragement that should be given to truly "married" couples- one man and one woman of similar age. It is a unit of society that is able to reproduce and raise children- one of the most important roles people can play to help society progress. It is a unit that is relatively stable and encourages a productive citizenry.

Mankind is fortunate in present times to be able to create such meaning with a label, which is the result of that label being passed down through history for countless generations.

By applying that term to a relationship or relationships that are not so inherently beneficial would either encourage poor behavior, thereby degrading our culture, or take the meaning that marriage has developed and allow that advantage to dwindle away as it becomes meaningless.

+++

This should not be an issue of government- as far as I'm concerned, "marriage" is already recognized by the people- the question is whether or not we should be recognizing gay couples as married.

It is so crucially important to make sure we encourage the right lifestyle choices. There is a uniqueness in a heterosexual relationship- and good behavior aside, that's the ability to produce children and raise them in a good environment. That deserves society's recognition and approval as something different and important.

More important than *anything else* is learning to accept people as people- no matter their sexual preference. Whether or not one chooses to engage in an unhealthy lifestyle is their choosing, but that lifestyle is made worse when lived in an environment of people who are not accepting.

I use more space to make the first point only because it is so much more controversial in nature. Please please never ever use anything I've said here to forward ideas of hate- that one person is any less than someone else for their differences. I can't plead strongly enough for people to become accepting and loving in character to people, any people, who mind their own business.