Gay Marriage: The Worst Idea Since New Coke

Matt Grills

The Massachusetts Supreme Court has a serious case of bossy going on.

The media conduct poll after poll in hopes of finding majority support for gay marriage. And in poll after poll, they are disappointed to find that most Americans aren’t in favor of it, because most Americans have common sense. Thus, the liberal establishment – comprised of activist judges, politicians with multiple-personality disorders and homosexual couples who wish to rewrite the Book of Genesis – is determined to annoy us until gay marriage is reality.

And of course it will be. We’ve allowed the courts to rule, and why should they lay down that power now? Conservatives are all in a tizzy about getting a federal marriage amendment prohibiting gay marriage. I have no faith in such an amendment. Even if it materializes, the America we’re becoming will undo it faster than a reality-show contestant shucks his clothes.

I can’t figure out why this is such a big honking deal to gays and lesbians. If they want to gain recognition and widespread acceptance for their lifestyle, they’re not exactly failing. You’re here. You’re queer. We know. Shut up already. We don’t hate you, but we do hate that everything in our national life suddenly has to be about you.

Surely this stomping of feet can’t just be about benefits. Homosexual couples claim they want fair treatment, but they have not demonstrated how giving them the privileges, subsidies and exemptions afforded heterosexual couples would benefit society as a whole. Homosexual couples, in essence, have no hand in creating the future. It shouldn’t be breaking news that heterosexuals do all the work in that department. Even the few homosexual couples that adopt children depend on heterosexual couples for those children. Heterosexual unions are in society’s best interest because reproduction keeps society going. Homosexual unions do not.

It’s that simple. Homosexual partners shouldn’t need the benefits of legally recognized marriage or even civil unions because their relationships should be irrelevant to the state. So should heterosexual relationships, for that matter. In fact, the only reason the state need tip its hat to heterosexual marriage is because the institution is, by and large, to thank for human survival and social order.

I don’t doubt that many homosexuals are in stable, committed relationships marked by fidelity. In America, they are not denied the opportunity to have those relationships, privately and publicly. But where will their quest for “equal rights” end? Only when every living soul on earth sings the praises of homosexuality, or so they hope. At its center, this crusade is less a quest for equal rights and treatment as it is a quest to earn the approval of all.

Gay marriage will not change the minds of religious folk who believe homosexuality is morally wrong. Gay marriage will not stop Christians from encouraging gays to come out of that lifestyle. On the other end of the spectrum, gay marriage will not shut the mouth of the obnoxious Rev. Fred “God Hates Fags” Phelps, nor will it stop the shameful and cruel hatred of some that resulted in the murder of Matthew Shepard.

Gay marriage will not change that “misunderstood” feeling that results from experiencing same-sex attraction in a world dominated by heterosexual attraction. Gay marriage will not bring about unanimous applause of homosexuality from heterosexuals. Isn’t that what this is about?

Supporters of gay marriage are correct when they say heterosexuals haven’t done such a marvelous job at preserving the sanctity of marriage. We have a high divorce rate. We have an epidemic of infidelity. We have luminaries like Britney Spears who seem to think 55 hours of marriage can deliver the same happiness as 50 years of it. We must do better.

Including gays, however, will not cure the ailing institution of marriage. The circle must be tightened, not expanded. Men and women wishing to enter into this covenant should understand that marriage is essentially about the other person – serving that person, loving that person. When married couples divorce, it is almost always due to the selfishness of one spouse or the other – infidelity, irreconcilable differences or whatnot.

Though homosexuals would disagree, their lifestyles – and, consequently, their unions – are all about self. The homosexual’s feelings or orientation, as well as the homosexual’s physical desires, are paramount. These considerations, when given the ultimate priority, are often the culprits behind failed heterosexual marriages. How, then, do homosexual marriages stand a chance?

I’d suggest our president and state legislatures put on the brakes, lest we follow the rest of the world over a cliff.

###

Matt Grills is a writer and conservative activist living in Indianapolis, where he works for a nonprofit organization. In 1997, he earned a bachelor's degree in religious studies from Olivet Nazarene University in Bourbonnais, Ill. He has written for a handful of Hoosier newspapers and is a member of the Indiana Leadership Forum, a program that encourages emerging community leaders to increase their involvement in the Republican Party.
darthgrills@hotmail.com