On The "Cheapening" of Marriage
Brian Anderson's South Park Conservatives (which I've now finished) notes that campus conservatives seem to split with middle-aged ones on the question of gay marriage, not least because they've seen so much marital hypocrisy from their parents' generation. As one student observes, heterosexuals have already done plenty to cheapen marriage."Heterosexuals have already done plenty to cheapen marriage." Undoubtedly true, but what conclusions do we draw from that? I want to blog more about this later, but for now I'll just observe that simply because we as a society do a poor job of honoring marriage is not an argument that marriage should be further dishonored, or that the concept of marriage should be altered fundamentally. It's the flimsiest of arguments, like saying, "Well, the Washington Monument is really falling apart and we have done a poor job of caring for it. Let's tear it halfway down, paint it blue, and change its shape." Maybe not the best analogy but I'll bet you get my point.
Dennis Prager has written passionately and convincingly about this. I've yet to see anyone (including the InstaPundit) come up with a well-made argument in opposition. Prager's stinging conclusion:
[W]hile most divorces are terribly sad, divorce itself no more undermines the institution of marriage than car crashes undermine the institution of driving. In fact, the vast majority of people who do divorce deeply wish to marry again; painful divorce has not undermined marriage even among those who have divorced.As Glenn might say: Indeed.
There may be honest reasons to support the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex couples. The argument that heterosexuals divorce a lot is not one of them. It is, in fact, demagoguery.