In Defense of Marriage

This week I’ve been thinking on some passages I’ve read about traditional marriage in regards to our society and culture as a whole. The concept of traditional marriage is the belief that marriage is between one man and one woman and I have had a lot of thoughts and feelings about this over the years. While reading the Syllabus of Obergefell v. Hodges in the US Supreme Court a lot of those thoughts and feelings bubbled up to the surface and I’ve needed to ponder deeply my understanding. I won’t be able to articulate in one post all that I am thinking of, but I will make a start of it.

I must first assert that I believe it is not only possible to have civil disagreements over this topic, but I also find it vitally important that we made our voices heard, so that the dialogue can be had and we can all make space for respect and understanding. As Dallin H. Oaks stated, “Even as we seek to be meek and to avoid contention, we must not compromise or dilute our commitment to the truths we understand. We must not surrender our positions or our values.” The more we discuss, the more we can understand various aspects of the issue. Additionally, if there is silence from certain viewpoints, we lose freedoms culturally, to hold different opinions in this regard.

That said, the arguments in this document in support of gay marriage are made very intelligently and they appear very logical in many respects. Reading of treatment that is unfair with regards to showing basic respect and human decency to the partners of a gay person, is difficult. To be forthright, I don’t understand why some of those rights weren't granted sooner under a provision for a civil union.  I think that most humans are decent and would never intentionally hold beliefs that are harmful to anyone. One of the arguments made likens the act of withholding legal marriage status to gay couples to that of the ban on interracial marriages. While this argument definitely tugs at heart-strings, one must wonder the opposing side. Is everyone who supports keeping traditional marriage only between a man and a woman, our generation’s equivalent of a racist?

I was thinking about the most basic necessities for societies to flourish, and one piece of logic came to my mind from a mentor of mine. He said, “If it would affect society negatively if everyone did it, we probably should not pass law saying that everyone could do it.” In this case, if everyone lived with a partner of the same gender, humans would disappear. This may sound overly simplistic, but at its core it is true. Justice Roberts, C.J. who dissented from the Supreme Court decision who said, “The premises supporting this concept of marriage are so fundamental that they rarely require articulation. The human race must procreate to survive. Procreation occurs through sexual relations between a man and a woman.” (http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf)

Members of the LDS church lean heavily on doctrine that speaks of marriage defined in the traditional sense. Russell M. Nelson, now president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints shared some thoughts on this topic in a commencement address in 2014, where he stated, “Male and female are created for what they can do and become, together. It takes a man and a woman to bring a child into the world. Mothers and fathers are not interchangeable. Men and women are distinct and complementary. Children deserve a chance to grow up with both a mom and a dad.”  These words caused me to question further. Is it unfair to deprive a child of the benefits of both the father and motherly influence during their upbringing? 

This quote is important as he points out the very important piece of doctrine that yes, children deserve both a father and a mother. That of course is not always the case, but it is the ideal many in society see is important in aiming for, and the research is beginning to show us how families are affected when the ideal is strayed from. In order to protect the positive family aspects that come with traditional marriage definition, we must first recognize that there is indeed inequity when both a father and mother are not present. If we as a society are trying to emulate a pattern that has worked well in societies the world over, for thousands of years, then we must protect these values. "The traditional definition of marriage has prevailed in every society that has recognized marriage throughout history. " Loving v. Virginia, O.T. 1966, No. 395, pp. 12–16

I have more thoughts on this topic, and I look forward to sharing more of them in the coming days.