The annulment of same sex marriage

Jun 6, 2012 by

Dean Kalahar

By Dean Kalahar –

A day can’t go by when the same sex marriage question is not portrayed as a mainstream issue. How much do we really know about this movement and what is at stake in its design?

According to five studies compiled by Gary Gates of the Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy at UCLA, the United States has approximately four million homosexual adults representing about 1.7 percent of the population. In 2000, the U.S. Census Bureau found that homosexual couples constitute less than 1% of American households. The Family Research Report says homosexuals make up about 2.5% of the population, while and The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force estimates approximately 6% of the population is homosexual?

Let’s assume that same sex couples are the ones championing the cause to change the definition of marriage since the issue most affects them. Even if we take into account underreporting and bias, the high end average of homosexuals in the U.S. would be 3%. Since not all homosexuals believe in same sex marriage, those that actually wish to marry diminish the cohort even further.

The most recent U.S. Census data reveal that in the last 15 years only one in five or 150,000 same-sex couples have taken advantage of legal recognition. This is less than six tenths of one percent (.6%) of the population. And since two-thirds of legally recognized same-sex couples in the United States are female, the number of committed men seeking marriage is about .2 percent of the population of 315 million Americans.

These numbers are not statistically significant to give same sex marriage legitimate consideration in a nation that understands the historic nature of institutions that hold civilized societies together? Sadly however, it does not take a lot of people to make a lot of noise and create the illusion of a mass movement.

The same sex marriage argument is in reality a fringe issue acting as a bandwagon of political correctness because Americans have been told it is the tolerant and progressive thing to believe. After all, who wants to have to answer to charges of homophobia, the default position thrown at anyone who dare challenge the agenda?

Those who believe in overturning traditional marriage have run a well marketed campaign of victimhood and oppression. This has been tied to identity politics, where politicians champion sub-groups of the population to garner votes first, in order to make them wards of the state second.

Charles C. Cooke’s research in Europe, where same sex marriage has been official for many years, confirms what we see in the U.S.

In Norway, which legalized civil unions in 1993, 190,000 heterosexual couples have filed for marriage to only 1300 same sex couples. While in Sweden, between 1995 and 2002, 280,000 heterosexual marriages were registered compared to 1,526 legal partnerships; a ratio of 183:1. Less than 1% of marriages in Sweden or Norway are to same sex couples.

In the Netherlands, gay marriage is actually declining in popularity. 2,500 gay couples married in 2001 -the year it was legalized- since then it has declined more than 50%. In 2009 more than 98% of marriages in the Netherlands were to opposite sex couples.

The same sex marriage agenda once took a covert route to incrementally gain approval with small victories that flew under the radar of common sense. Today, the movement has bought into its own myth and now brazenly injects itself into every corner of the culture to create the appearance of normalcy. Even so, 31 states do not grant any form of legal recognition to same sex couples, and 44 out of the 50 states do not allow for same sex marriage. The Federal government has never had a law sanctioning same sex marriage.

Some say the fight for same sex marriage has been a generational struggle. Yet a scant 15 years ago, Hawaii became the first state in the union to allow “reciprocal-beneficiary registration for same-sex couples.”Was there some moment of enlightenment that befell humanity to discover the same sex marriage was a right that had been ignored for centuries?

Or is it possible the thousands of years of marriage and family institution stability settled any serious inquiry?

Even the cry to be married in the same sex community is not as strong as it is in the traditional marriage community. Heterosexual couples are up to eight times more interested in registering their relationships than homosexual couples.

And if the need for same sex marriages is all about “love,” then the divorce rate among heterosexual couples should pale in comparison to devoted same sex couples. Again Cooke’s research in Norway and Sweden shows male same-sex marriages are 50 percent more likely to end in divorce than heterosexual marriages, and female same-sex marriages are an astonishing 167 percent more likely to be dissolved in Norway.

Same sex marriage is not a religious question. Any form of worship can reflect on marriage and sexual behavior in any way it so chooses as a matter of faith. And anyone can choose to attend and adhere to those tenants as long as laws are not violated. Religious creeds celebrate weddings however, they do not have the power to set laws that impact every individual, like issuing marriage licenses. That job is left to representative government.
Majority rights with minority protections must be respected. But this canon does not mean that minority demands must not be questioned. To apply same sex marriage to the 14th Amendment directed at freed slaves who were previously considered property and not citizens is intellectual malpractice. Every American has the same “equal protections” in civil/criminal law, contract and property rights.

As far as a civil rights issue, every American has the exact same marriage rights. No law prohibits any man or woman from marring a member of the opposite sex and, absent from medical reasons, engaging in reproductive behaviors so as to conceive a child and start a family.

Marriage is not about feelings, orientation, emotions or desires of adults. Those subjects are not germane to this topic. Government sponsorship of marriage sanctions biological fact with a legal commitment between a man and a woman to form a family, procreate and raise children. This institutional contract offers the best case scenario for the development of children and the survival of the human race. There may be other less optimal situations where kids are raised, but, the government must defend the biological family unit in its legal determination of marriage.

For some in the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community, the same sex marriage battle is really a maladaptive coping strategy to avoid self awareness. By advancing a demand for universal legal acceptance -using the court of public opinion to sway courts of justice- advocates are attempting to legitimize a personal, social, gender, or sexual framework at the expense of self acceptance, natural law and institutional stability.

At the end of the day, or any century, attempting to redefine something as basic to biology as gravity is to physics is dangerous and destructive. It’s time to annul the same sex marriage debate.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Related Posts

Tags

Share This

1 Comment

  1. Avatar
    Kelly

    You seem to be forgetting a great deal of legitimate information that counters your agument. You stated in your article, “Government sponsorship of marriage sanctions biological fact with a legal commitment between a man and a woman to form a family, procreate and raise children.” This however, is untrue. If marriage was purely designed to reproduce then men and women who are unable to produce children would also be prohibited to get married. The worst thing that could happen with the legalization of same sex marriage is that people of the same sex will get married. If you consider yourself heterosexual and do not have any current plans to get married to a fellow man, then that is fine. Please stop being selfish and trying to prohibit other people from happiness. None of the facts you provided justify not legalizing same sex marriage. If anything, this article shows to what extent homosexuals are targeted by conservative America. Thank you for completely swaying me to support same sex marriage. Your article made me nauseous.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.