Contrary to the claims of Maggie Gallagher, polygamy is not about "an attempt to secure stable mother-father families for children" - it is for the *production* of children, but beyond that, what it is primarily attempting to do has little else to do with children, and everything to do with the desires of the adults and, more specifically, their sectarian culture. Religious sects always emphasizes the *production* of children - but once those children are produced, the main focus of religion becomes, not safety, not security, not self-fulfillment or personal growth, but *obedience* to the patriarchy.
As for "traditional" marriage: If a relatively tiny proportion of the population can in *ANY* way "destroy" it, then the fact of the matter is that "traditional" marriage was/is already on its death-bed and cannot be resuscitated by Gallagher's hysterics about "making babies to preserve the culture" (which sounds to me like "code" for *white* society, since her speeches imply she is not in favor of adopting Asian, African, or Middle-Eastern children...).
Further more, if marriage is, as Gallagher and her acolytes claim, ALL (i.e., only) about *producing* children, then the inevitable extension of that is: once those children reach the "traditional" age of adulthood, these marriages should be dissolved - as should any childless marriage; and *any* people unable to have children should be prohibited from getting married. This would of course include such "lifestyles" as Genetic Mosaicism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_mosaicism) and Intersexuality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex) - which, given Gallagher's sectarian so-called "logic", must, contrary to any and all known biological science, also be "a lifestyle choice" because "God does not make junk".
Like other obsessive paranoid narcissists, however, Gallagher is incapable of following through to the consequences of her, and her followers', own so-called "reasoning". Given that men still generally have shorter lifespans than women, one wonders what she and her cabal plan to do about "single people in nursing homes" - perhaps follow the ancient "tradition" of "send the wife into the afterlife along with her husband"?
If "traditional" marriage is "in danger", it is because
1) too many people are pressured to marry at too young and age;
2) absurd romanticized pap about "white knights" and "riding off into the sunset" continue to supercede real and practical information about things like how to budget, how to share finances, and how to maintain one's own personhood within a relationship;
3) women are still too often treated as subservient to the husband, and too many "traditional" marriages are not any different at all from the Koranic implication that a woman is worth 1/2 of a man;
4) there are still far too many loveless marriages;
5) and several other well-documented stresses within "traditional" marriage that lead to things like the 50%+ divorce rate, sd well as battered spouses and children.
It is NOT "under threat" because a rather small minority of people wish to practice their civil Constitutional right to enter into the contract known as marriage. Just as it is not "under threat" because, in addition to priests, pastors, rabbis, and so on, *the State* also grants people such as Justices of the Peace, in some rare cases Notary Publics, and so on, to pronounce closure of the contract - which must also be registered with City Hall in order to be considered legal. This is why even a religious representative says: "By the power invested in me by the state of [insert state name], I now pronounce you..." In other words, marriage is a legal contract, and the Constitution grants equal rights to all citizens under the law - most especially concerning contract law. Again, Gallagher and her ilk invoke the Constitution in the same selective way that they invoke the Bible: when it suits *their own* purposes - meaning, their own egocentrism.
The things that are wrong in "traditional" marriage will NOT simply disappear even if the agents provocateur of intolerance and hatred *did* manage to prevent gay marriage (or fulfill their end-goal of wiping out all GLBT people...) If anything, that sort of obsessive narcissism, funneled into hatred of anyone and anything that is not an exact clone of the narcissist, and leading to a compulsion to control others to force them to be "appropriately" compliant, *is* one of the problems in "traditional" marriage. Were this not the case, Gallagher and her ilk would spend more time addressing the psychoemotional, physical, and even sexual abuse that, distressingly to the rest of us, is not all that uncommon in the much-vaunted and supposedly-perfect "traditional" marriage and family. At elast some of those who have endured, and survived, such abuse consider this deliberate oversight to be, at best, disgusting and serving nothing but their own narrow-minded obsession.
Comments are closed for this post.
