Home › Blogs › aberman's blog ›

Plea for Help: A Clean Short Statement Defending Traditional Marriage

Submitted by aberman on Tue, 07/29/2008 - 19:02

Take a look at the following list:

  • Abortion:  "Life begins at conception," vs. "Women should have the right to control their bodies."
  • Affirmative Action: "It's just reverse racism," vs. "It makes up for past and present discrimination."
  • Gun Control: "The 2nd Amendment clearly gives us the right to own guns," vs. "Guns are killing Americans in huge numbers."

Note how each side of the debate has a defense of their position expressible in under 15 words.  These summations may not capture all the details, but they are enough to allow someone to defend their point of view in a casual conversation.  Furthermore, as slogans, they are great for less-engaged people to hold in their heads.  They memorize them and use these short slogans to defend their point of view to themselves. 

Now, here's my question.  Take Same Sex Marriage. I oppose it, but when I try to write down why I oppose it, I usually wind up writing something like this:

  Throughout history, Marriage has been used by societies to bind men and women together.  This is essential for the maintenance of society.  Linking these bindings to homosexual relationships will damage...

and on and on I go.  Meanwhile, the other side says:

 Marriage is a civil right and should be open to all.

Of course I can poke giant holes in this one, but the fact is, at this point, I'm playing defense in a framework set by the other side.  You can imagine how the conversation sounds to a listener who's trying to decide what's right.  What I really want is a simple phrase that supports traditional marriage.

So-- can anyone give a nice clean statement supporting traditional marriage laws in 15 words or less? 

5
Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

Comments

Strong families are built on traditional marriage.

Submitted by Freedoms Truth on Tue, 07/29/2008 - 23:22.

Huh ... It is a bit tough. The gay rights crowd has adopted a narrative of 'equality' around a concept that would have been considered absurd to unthinkable a mere 2 decades prior, bypassing the fact that dictionary definition of marriage is a legally instituted union of one man and one woman, so that 'gay marriage' is a linguistic oxymoron. speaking of 'gay marriage' instead of the truth that marriage is getting radically redefined to incorporate homosexual couples is speaking the language of the gay rights activists. It is better to rephrase the question "Do we protect traditional marriage or do we redefine it?" The fact that this is bad public policy requires a complex rebuttal argument:

Gay couples are not the same as man-woman couples, but the drive for gay marriage is the drive to harden the myth of equivalence into rigid law. Marriage between one man and one woman supports families and their care of children, which is a building block of all successful civilizations. Messing with marriage messes with the next generation and the future of our civilization. It is not wise to undermine such vital institutions for the sake of getting gay couples feel 'equivalent' in  their lifestyle to married couples, most of whom are Moms and Dads raising the next generation.

An attempt to simplify these points to bumper sticker-level:

Strong families are built on traditional marriage. Support families, support marriage.

Gay Marriage is an oxymoron.  (or "Gay goes with Marriage like Fish goes with Bicycle")

 As for this argument:

 "Marriage is a civil right and should be open to all."

Marriage is an institution, not a 'civil right'. Of course all adult men have the same equivalent right to marry one adult woman, so it is currently open to the same set of individuals as it would be under this change, but with different rules. "All"? Kids? Animals? Two old men and ten teenaged women who want to start a new FLDS / Branch Davidian cult? Two sisters? The statement is self-refuting. Gay marriage advocates do NOT want to do what the statement implies.

Hmmm.....

Submitted by DevilsAdvocate on Wed, 07/30/2008 - 08:22.

"The Government should be able to pass judgment on your relationships" might get at the heart of what you're going for. Or possibly "Vague, unproven fears merit restricting freedoms." That would work too.

Devils Advocate indeed

Submitted by Freedoms Truth on Wed, 07/30/2008 - 15:51.

"Vague, unproven fears merit restricting freedoms."

Nobody's freedoms are being restricted by maintaining and protecting the current definition of marriage. That is itself fearmongering.

More on the topic here:

http://www.allianceformarriage.org/