On Marriage...

In the last few years America has seen quite a debate about marriage, its value to society, and its place in the future of our country. I'd just like to address one dimension of the debate.

I've heard it postulated that traditional or historical definitions of "marriage" and "family" are valuable and worth preserving. That is to say that a marriage is the legally sanctioned union of one man and one woman and that their family consists of children either naturally born to them or legally adopted by them. Further, just as society recognizes the definition of the number "two" to be a specific and exact value, society recognizes the definition of "marriage" in similarly narrow terms. These definitions preclude homosexual unions and hetero-specie unions from being recognized as "marriages" and deny "family" status to any beings affiliated with or deriving from such unions.

I happen to agree with this view and I support it completely. My views stem from my observation of society, my moral and religious beliefs, and the inner sense I have of right and wrong.

The single dimension of the debate I would like to address is the false choice put forward by opponents of marriage as follows. They point out the unhappiness of women they know who are married. They point out the emotional and physical abuse that is perpetrated by cruel spouses. They point out the infidelity that is rampant in American society as if it were a uniquely "married" problem. Therefore, they conclude, that because marriage has been desecrated by some of its participants, the concept of marriage should not be held sacred by society.

In fact, they continue, society would be better off without the institution all together. As if to say that absent marriage, women would be happy, partners would cease to be emotionally and physically abusive, and fidelity would reign in relationships.

Following that logic, I would like to suggest this analogy.

In the desert of the American Southwest there are what we call "slot canyons", narrow cuts in solid sandstone where water has carved out deep holes and steep cliffs. They are spectacular. In the depths of these canyons, even in the driest parts of the summer, one can find pools of cool water.

However, one would not want to drink it. In fact, the smell of this water is extremely offensive. The pools are tainted with manure, algae, bacteria, insect larvae, and frequently the bodies of dead animals. Drinking this water can cause fatal diseases.

The problem is not that all water is bad, though. The problem is the pollution that has gotten into it. The water component of the toxic soup is one of life's essential nutrients. Eliminating water from one's diet is not an option. One would be well to find a clear source of water and steer clear of the pollution altogether. Water is key to human survival.

In the case of marriage in America, the problem is not the institution; rather it is the pollution of cruelty, abuse, infidelity and deception that have crept into it. The choice, then, is not whether or not to continue upholding marriage as a valued tradition of our society.

The question may also be answered with a "Third Way". Society can re-examine marriage and re-commit to making it a central part of American life because of the real benefits we as a people gain from its place in our culture. Pure marriage, after its original intent, is not only good; it is essential to the survival of civil society.