Supreme Court decisions in support of gay marriage

How are those of us who hold to the sanctity of traditional marriage to respond to the recent Supreme Court decisions in support of gay marriage? Rather than take the well-travelled road of bluster followed by retreating to lick our wounds until the next cultural crisis, let me suggest a better way. That is—instead of exerting our energies criticizing the dark forces that are tearing down yet another treasured traditional institution, let’s look in a mirror. If you look at the roots of this cultural decline, you will see that—as with many broad and seemingly rapid cultural shifts, (e.g. the sanctity of life) this breakdown of our understanding of marriage has been neither rapid, nor is the homosexual community and their powerful advocates the fundamental perpetrators. We mustn’t think the recent Supreme Court decisions are the cause of this current cultural change; they are instead, symptoms of it.


The broader truth is—if marriage as an institution would have been zealously guarded (as is appropriate for a foundational institution of society), the events of this past week would never have occurred. The real issue here is not that the notion of homosexual marriage has diminished traditional marriage, but that the collective cultural understanding of marriage has been gradually shrinking for decades to the point where now it appealing and accessible to homosexuals.

A brief survey of the erosion of the matrimonial landscape over the last few decades reveals that this latest assault on marriage is simply one more attack in what has been a long, protracted war. In most states before the 1970’s, a marriage partner had to legally prove their spouse to be guilty of a crime or a covenant-breaking sin in order to divorce. In this way, the culture protected marriage because it was universally understood to be worth protecting. Although that system was not without its faults, it was at least consistent with a culture that valued marriage as one of its supporting pillars. Today, divorce often involves little more than filling out some paperwork (available online) and sending it to your soon-to-be-ex-spouse for his/her signature. How is that ease of extraction consistent with a sacred institution? The average female in America is 27 when she marries. Males are 29. This would be laudable if the delay was for the purpose of achieving optimal maturation and maximum preparation prior to entering into the hallowed estate of marriage. Most of the time, the delay is purely a matter of convenience, as indicated by a recently released study from the Center for Disease Control revealing that only 23% of women marry without first cohabitating with their future spouses.

One of the justifications recently heard for maintaining a traditional view of marriage is that only heterosexuals can procreate--a foundational purpose of marriage—to produce families. Although I agree with this line of thinking, it’s little wonder this argument has minimal traction in a nation where according to a recent U.S. Census Bureau report, 62% of new moms under 20 are unmarried. The truth that traditional families provide the best environment for raising healthy children tragically must be taken by faith in many contexts.

When taken altogether, it seems clear that it is simply inaccurate to portray what happened in the Supreme Court recently as a dramatic storming of the mighty Fortress of marriage by the opportunistic and well-funded homosexual community. It is far more accurate to say that the once (long ago) culturally exalted, armor-plated vehicle of marriage manifested by a life-long, radical and sacrificial commitment between two people, has been reduced to a user-friendly, mini-Cooper small enough to appeal to anyone who wants to buy a couple of rings and head for the courthouse.