In Defense of Marriage
By Michael T. McPhearson
Jan/Feb/Mar
2001
Did
you see Fox’s “Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?” Fifty women
participated in what the commercials for the event termed a pageant.
They displayed their bodies, were asked several questions, and the woman
who most caught the eye of the then unnamed male millionaire won the
chance to marry the guy. When I first saw the commercial I could not
believe it. No way, I must have misunderstood. I called Fox and looked
at their web site. There it was. Maybe a few years ago it may not have
bothered me as much, but as I have observed Gay, Lesbian, and
Transgender people fight for their right to be recognized as equal
citizens on the issue of marriage, I have become more sensitive to the
sanctity of the institution. 
What
is marriage? The institution has meant different things to different
societies. But most cultures have recognized marriage as an essential
building block to their way of life. At its most basic, marriage is a
socially sanctioned union between two people. There are various types of
marriages; polyandry, polygyny, and monogamy; and they have
traditionally been defined as a relationship between men and women. The
ideal reasons for marrying have changed from that of practicality with
economics, religion, child rearing, and prestige being the major
considerations, to relationship building between the couple with love
and commitment being the idealized considerations. Today most societies
require civil action for the union to be recognized as legitimate. In an
1878 ruling concerning polygamy, the United States Supreme Court
declared that marriage is a civil contract regulated by law. This in
effect means that the State shall decide what is and is not a marriage.
The State will determine the legal relationship between the couple when
and if the union is recognized. If the characteristics of a couple’s
relationship do not meet the standards of the State, the State has no
obligation to acknowledge said couple’s declaration. But most people in
the United States view marriage as more than a civil matter as testified
by the millions of ceremonies each year in houses of worship through out
the country. In fact in most cultures marriage has been and is
accompanied by mores formed in the societies’ religious tradition(s).
Recent human rights gains have led to homosexual couples
who not long ago could only dream of being married; now demanding their
relationships be recognized as marriage. There has been resistance to
State recognition of same sex marriages. The most active voices have
been the conservative religious establishment. It has stringently
opposed the recognition of same sex couples as married based on their
religious doctrine that homosexuality is morally wrong and that the
sacred compact of marriage can only be made between a women and a man.
The majority of Americans be it by a slim margin or by apathetic default
seems to agree that same sex relationships should not be seen as
marriage, but committed same sex couples’ civil rights should not
necessarily be compromised. Thus we have a slow but steady movement
towards domestic partnership spreading across the country.
A domestic partner can be thought of as a relationship
between two people that fall out of the traditional meaning of family,
but is as committed and interdependent a relationship as between
idealized family members. At one time domestic partners may have been
people who lived together in committed relationships but for one reason
or another had decided not to marry. These couples, usually
heterosexual, chose to live together or "shacking-up" outside the
communal definition of marriage. There are several reasons for the
current push towards wider recognition of domestic partnerships. The
makeup of the American household has changed drastically over the past
one hundred years. All types of people live together today. Siblings,
retired persons, couples, and life long friends who all want recognition
as being connected in more than a passing none committed way. These
groups of people face the same healthcare and other domestic expenditure
challenges that any other family faces. Thus, recognition through
extension of benefits is the aim in the domestic partnership movement.
But many Gay and
Lesbian couples want more than equal legal status to marriage. They want
their relationships to be recognized by society as equal to marriage in
every way. Their position is that the only status equal to marriage is
marriage itself, and domestic partnership for same sex couples wishing
to marry is a compromise. The domestic partnership discourse has brought
into focus for the nation the wish of many same sex couples to marry.
Many of these couples are challenging marriage laws in court and slowly
making gains. But the fight will be long.
1
of 2
