Same-Sex Marriage: A Dissenting Opinion

David Frum has now thrown in the towel on same sex “marriage” .  In point of fact his original view was correct. This conjugal view of marriage is the conservative position and easily defended by those with the wit and heart to do so.

Same-sex marriage is the equivalent of the government mandating that two plus two equals five.  Those who continue to say it equals four will be punished. That is what occurs wherever same-sex “marriage” is introduced.  The union of a man and a man or a woman and a woman is a new thing and should have a different name.  If it is to be implemented different rules and traditions-complementary to the nature of the sexes involved in them-would build up over time.  Calling these new institutions marriage is simply government backing of a falsehood with grim consequences for those who insist two plus two remains four.

In New York the damage to the Republican Party will be lasting and swift.  If a Republican controlled Senate does not stop same sex marriage, and indeed calls it an emergency measure and passes it with the skullduggery we have come to expect from all gay rights victory of this decade-there is no reason for social conservatives to support the party.  The news outlets have been crowing about the moneyed Republican gay rights elites fixing this deal.

The non-moneyed, non-elites have votes.  They know who caved and they will react by ousting them or staying home.  Either will destroy what is left of the Republican Party in New York.  New York now stands as a test case for the idea that a socially liberal Republican Party will be a stronger Republican Party.  The New York Republican Party could hardly be weaker -- but weaker it will be.  They will lose the Senate in the next election.  The only redoubt of the Party in the State has been punted to support a policy that is a priority only for those who hate Republicans and conservatives with the fiercest intensity.  The dim merits of same sex marriage aside this was politically idiotic.

It is not without significance that this travesty was pushed by Andrew Cuomo whose disregard of marriage and its importance -- and the collective shrug it engendered -- I have written about previously.

Mr. Frum’s change of heart on this issue seems to be because same sex marriage in a few states has not lead to family Armageddon.  Why is that the standard?  Are conservatives only allowed to oppose something if it creates an absolute catastrophe, or are they allowed to oppose policies that marginally injure important institutions?

As I note in the Sandra Lee blog post marriage in the North East has been in decline for years.  Same sex marriage both in America and in Europe seems to be the coup de grace to marriage as an institution rather than a precipitating force. Last year New York finally acceded to “no fault’ divorce.  This law is of a piece.  The conservative shrug Mr. Frum detects in some quarters is echoed, in of all places, the em>American Spectator.<

This is the view that marriage has already been destroyed by the consequences of the 60’s so who cares?  I adhere to the view that liberalism can always make a bad situation worse, particularly if its view is codified.

I have written about the dysfunction of the New York Republican Party before.  Recently I foretold the weakness of the GOP in the last election.  As I said at the time:

Albany is entirely Democratic-controlled and is loathed by the electorate.  New York is experiencing record deficits and population drain, all under unified Democratic control.  The New York Senate hangs in the balance in a year when redistricting will take place.  Retaking the Senate could prevent the worst kind of gerrymandering.  An enormous opportunity wasted.  We could have been the ‘27 Yankees. We are shaping up to be the ‘62 Mets.

The Senate was retaken but is playing like the '62 Mets.  Weak reed Republicans took a few seats and these weak reeds were the margin of victory.  This bill was passed with the exact principleless back room deals that make Albany hated throughout New York.  Had the GOP been stronger marriage might still exist in New York.

Now we will see the attack on those who disagree with the falsehood that is same-sex marriage driven from traditional areas they have always dominated. Anyone who believes the protections for conscience in this bill will not be narrowed can buy a bridge in Brooklyn cheap.  I don’t believe religion should be the sole, or even main, reason for not having to participate in calling these shams “marriage”.  One does not have to believe in God to believe that men and women are different that marriage is between them, precedes the State of New York, and will be around long after it ceases to be and that it is a unique institution deserving of unique support and a unique name.

One thing about same-sex marriage.  Its proponents are always strongest in places that are losing population and are weakening in political strength.  As a social conservative would predict; the abandonment of marriage leads to a dearth of children, of youth and of vibrancy.  That is what we see in New York which will lose two congressional seats.  Save for Iowa-where a Court foisted same-sex marriage on the State-all other same-sex marriage states are in the North East; an area in political and cultural decline for 50 years.

The adoption of same-sex marriage and the abandonment of the conjugal view of marriage has a fin-de-siècle  feel to it.  Where the electorate does not feel marriage is important in its own right-same sex marriage can be adopted-where it is still a respected institution-it can not be.  New York now belongs in the former camp.  The GOP will find that a clear definition of marriage is not all that it has kicked away.