Here’s a bit of humorous irony. With all of the religious folks who want to legislate their Bible morality on the LBGT community and deny them the same rights to marriage that the rest of us have, it seems they’ve missed the real threat to marriage. Remember these folks are claiming that somehow if a homosexual couple marries, my own 23 year and counting marriage will be weakened. Huh? Well, they are saying that gay marriage will weaken the institution of marriage. I don’t claim to understand this argument at all.
However, the real threat to marriage seems to be the civil unions they dreamed up in response to the perfectly reasonable request that homosexuals be allowed to marry.
In France, where they have now had civil unions for a decade, what has really happened is that heterosexuals have said enough of the death-do-us-part tradition of marriage. Overwhelming numbers of heterosexual couples are choosing the far easier to break contract of a civil union.
Oh horrors!! This could put divorce lawyers out of business.
What next? Heinlein’s term marriages with specific lengths of contract? “Darling, I love you! Will you marry me for a period of 5 years with a renewable option at the end provided we both still love each other?” — Not very romantic, I admit. But, who knows? Maybe it’s going to be the next modification to a less intrusive document. As unromantic as it sounds, there is something to recognizing that even in marriage, every day is a choice to remain with one’s spouse. Thinking about it another way, after 23 years and counting, my wife is still choosing me and I am still choosing her each and every day. It is romantic when put that way. Perhaps keeping the contract flexible will highlight this point more thoroughly.
Perhaps it will even open the door to other types of marriage. For my part, if 14 individuals of any combination of genders want to get together and be life partners, who am I to interfere. Just make the tax code fair and the law non-discriminatory. None of these multiple wife laws that don’t also allow for multiple husbands based on some ancient religion. As long as it’s fair, I’m for it. Personally, one man one woman happens to work for me. But, I have no problem with other options for other people, line marriages, gay marriages, threesomes, moresomes, not my business. The plural of spouse is spice.
The big stretch the right-wingers need to make is realizing that A) nothing is right for everyone and B) they don’t get to decide the lives of others.