- ‘Harry Potter’ religion class seeks to enlighten students on ‘God, sin, and theodicy’
- ‘Optionally piloted’ Black Hawk helicopter clears tests; future missions to go ‘fully unmanned’
- Vice News reporter kidnapped in Ukraine is freed after being beaten, blindfolded
- FCC’s new ‘net neutrality’ proposal sparks outrage among consumer advocates
- Families of ferry’s lost confront South Korean officials
- 2-week truce for Sriracha hot sauce maker, California city
- NYC’s de Blasio seeks to ban wood-burning fireplaces
- Residents angry Obama mispronounced town’s name during mudslide visit
- Israel halts peace talks with Palestinians
- Netanyahu’s driver accused of raping girls under age 12
WETZSTEIN: Marriage gays want is altered
After I’ve written about gay marriage for 12 years, more than a few people have asked me how this issue got to be so big.
Marriage is centuries old, and until a few years ago, no enduring culture ever recognized same-sex marriage, at least on par with heterosexual marriage. Why is America consumed with this debate?
There are well-crafted answers from gay writers like Andrew Sullivan, Jonathan Rauch, Evan Wolfson and E.J. Graff. A major line of reasoning says that now that we know sexual orientation is as unchanging and inborn as skin color or national origin, gay marriage is a civil right.
I will leave that (deeply contested) civil rights argument aside for now and instead highlight an article that says heterosexuals opened the door to gay marriage: Long before gay couples asked for marriage licenses, the institution of marriage itself already had been “radically redefined” by activists, judges, academics and others, says Bryce Christensen, English professor at Southern Utah University, in a 2004 paper called “Why Homosexuals Want What Marriage Has Now Become.”
Previously, marriage was defined by religious doctrine and moral tradition. It was divinely ordained, and couples were expected to embrace commitments to childbearing, religious attendance, distinctive sex roles (i.e., breadwinner/homemaker) and lifelong sexual fidelity to each other. However, a series of events, beginning with America’s shift from an agricultural nation to an industrial one, left the institution of marriage “badly bloodied.”
Men went away to work, leaving women to toil alone “in a functionally diminished home,” and “advertisers, manufacturers and educators” moved in to assist those homemakers, Mr. Christensen writes. But instead of the American home remaining a hub of family activity, it evolved by the 1950s into an “incidental parking place,” where family members met to consume goods and relax, according to Harvard sociologist Pitirim Sorokin.
Marriage was further undermined in the 1960s, as home cooking and sewing gave way to restaurants and store-bought goods. Child care, home maintenance and car repair were turned over to paid professionals. Entertainment revolved around the television and other purchased diversions.
The religious undergirding of marriage (i.e., Scriptures that praised childbearing and man-woman complementarity and prohibited fornication and adultery) came under attack. As intellectuals and elites pounded Judeo-Christian values, the exciting counterculture of communes, drugs, free sex and rebellious music swept the land. Self-gratification was in, self-sacrifice was out.
The entry of millions of women into the work force severely torqued marriage. Husbands and wives became “economic clones,” each vying to be a “good provider.” Married couples had fewer children, while DINK households — dual incomes, no kids — proliferated.
Then, as no-fault divorce swept the country in 1970s and 1980s, these marriages of “two careerists in the same bed” (as author Wendell Berry called them) became vulnerable because marriage became increasingly about rights and interests that “must be constantly asserted and defended.”
Once marriage became “bereft of a healthy home economy, frequently devoid of children, and threatening to dissolve at any moment” and yet remained the most convenient way to get insurance, employment and government benefits (i.e., Social Security), it became an institution “that homosexuals finally wanted” to participate in, Mr. Christensen writes.
I spoke with Mr. Christensen recently to get an update. He sees no signs of a “Great Awakening” in religion and only inklings of a revival of home-based “cottage industries.” He remains confident that America’s path to gay marriage started not with gay couples wanting to marry, but with heterosexuals who wanted new rules of engagement for themselves.
• Cheryl Wetzstein can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Cheryl Wetzstein covers family and social issues as a national reporter for The Washington Times. She has been a reporter for three decades, working in New York City and Washington, D.C. Since joining The Washington Times in 1985, she has been a features writer, environmental and consumer affairs reporter, and assistant business editor.
Beginning in 1994, Mrs. Wetzstein worked exclusively ...
- Divided court strikes down big porn award
- 10 million new babies? China's hope for boom likely to become policy bust
- Judge voids N. Dakota's 'heartbeat' abortion law
- Family, agency in custody battle over sick daughter
- Values group wins court round over use of gay marriage photo
Latest Blog Entries
- Gay therapy ban author seeks Calif. House seat
- Transgender 'bathroom law' gets 5,000 more signatures
- Pro-life, stem-cell bill signed into law by Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback
- N. Dakota lawmakers approve tough abortion bill
- Pope Benedict XVI's successor should allow priests to get a new title: Husband, poll finds
TWT Video Picks
By Andrew P. Napolitano
Obama's veil of secrecy is pierced
- In its hunt for Senate, Republican candidates campaign against Harry Reid
- Obamacare class-action suit opens a new legal front
- 'Top Gun' for drones: Squadrons of carrier-based killers have Navy's approval
- List Hillary Clinton's successes? State Dept. spokeswoman flubs answer
- Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy hailed as patriot, ripped as lawless deadbeat
- 'Conservatives' should feel exposed by Bundy's racist comments: Scarborough
- America is an oligarchy, not a democracy or republic, university study finds
- Sold out: Ukraine's leadership swapped best military weapons for cash
- Texas is next! AG warns BLM wants 90,000 acres after Bundy ranch standoff
- Opposition rising to Colorado gun control laws
Top 10 handguns in the U.S.
Celebrity deaths in 2014