May 15th, 2008
I salute the CA Supreme Court for overturning the ban on gay marriage. Frankly, I really don’t see why some people are so opposed to the idea.
The argument that I keep hearing against allowing gay marriage is that permitting gays to marry a) tramples on the sanctity of marriage, and b) goes against the tradition of marriage. On the first point, I think marriage is only as sacred as the married couple makes it. Remember years ago when Britney Spears got loaded in Vegas and married an old friend of hers, only to annul it a day later? Where was the uproar against the sanctity of marriage back then? Where’s the sanctity in a drive-thru chapels? Etc, etc.
On the second point, let’s not kid ourselves and pretend the institution has not evolved over thousands of years. If marriage had never evolved with the times, here’s what we would still be stuck with:
- Wives would be the legal property of husbands.
- Dowries would be required by the bride’s family.
- If a woman’s father died without male heirs, that woman could be forced to marry her nearest male relative—even if she that meant divorcing her current husband. (That chestnut was around in Ancient Greece.)
- Polygamy would be no big deal.
So let’s be thankful that our concept of, and traditions around, marriage have evolved with our society. I’m sure people in ancient Greece similarly freaked out when women couldn’t be forced to marry a male relative. So let’s all take a deep breath and try to get some perspective.
