Ruining the Sanctity of Marrige...

So I was watching Rachel Maddow today and she brought something, totally non-health care related, that was very, very interesting about Massachusetts.

For those who don't know, Mass. is the first state to legalize same-sex marriage. Now this was back in 2004...since then there has been all eyes on Mass. to see what results the highly controversial bill would yield.

To religious conservatives same sex marriage is the end of all things civil. Many on the right have made pretty radical comparisons to legalizing homosexual marriage to things like bestiality and polygamy. Some have even argued that quality of life, in general, will decrease. Yet all these, rather radical statements have been topped off with the argument used most against same-sex marriage: it will ruin the sanctity, or definition, of marriage.

Never mind the fact that the definition of marriage has changed quite a bit (polygamy used to be legal and black marriage was illegal), lets take a look at the big fish: ruining the sanctity of marriage.

Maddow reported in her segment on MSNBC that the divorce rates in the Mass. has actually declined to pre-World War II levels. Back when stereotypical perfect families like the "Stevens" or the "Johnson's" existed. Yeah. The sanctity of marriage is that good in Mass.

To make matters worse for anti-gay marriage activists, the number of divorces in Mass is declining. So not only is the sanctity of marriage being preserved....its getting better.

I guess I just really don't understand the argument against same sex marriage. They claim same sex marriage will, disarm the quality of life...yet the only proof relevant to this claim, is proof against it! Massachusetts is doing fine.

Then they say...well gay marriage will ruin the traditional lifestyle of Americans . I have two problems with that argument. 1) I don't really see why it matters if there is no consequence for doing so. 2) the tradition of American lifestyle is reforming outdated ideals! Such anti-gay activist ideals...

My favorite is that if gay marriage passes...the definition of marriage will fundamentally change. To which I respond...are you holding a definition above the undeniable rights of a human. But in all seriousness, unless changing the definition has some sort of invisible consequence we are not aware of...why does it matter?

I invite any conservative reading this, to give me one good reason same sex marriage shouldn't be allowed. Anything is fair game.


But to be honest...I don't think there really is any merit behind anti-gay marriage activist ideals. If Massachusetts has taught us anything... its that gay marriage 1) does nothing but allows gay marriage, 2) preserves the "sanctity of marriage" the same if not better than straight marriage, and my favorite... 3) makes an entire population happy.