The Decline Of Marriage [UPDATED]

Donald Sensing writes for the Wall Street Journal this morning, and sets the record straight on the state of marriage:

Sex, childbearing and marriage now have no necessary connection to one another, because the biological connection between sex and childbearing is controllable. The fundamental basis for marriage has thus been technologically obviated. Pair that development with rampant, easy divorce without social stigma, and talk in 2004 of 'saving marriage' is pretty specious. There's little there left to save. Men and women today who have successful, enduring marriages till death do them part do so in spite of society, not because of it.

....................

I believe that this state of affairs is contrary to the will of God. But traditionalists, especially Christian traditionalists (in whose ranks I include myself) need to get a clue about what has really been going on and face the fact that same-sex marriage, if it comes about, will not cause the degeneration of the institution of marriage; it is the result of it. [Emphasis in original]

I can't help but agree. Things got out of hand a long time ago, and society is hurting as a result. This is not to say I think that we should capitulate to SSM advocates - it is still wrong, and against the very nature of democracy, to impose social rules by fiat - and I'm not sure (as Rev. Sensing is) that "this fight is over," but we do need to wake up. The truth is that we started to lose this battle decades ago.

I doubt SSM advocates will pick up on this column as a rallying cry. It would require an admission that their cause is but a further degenerative of the norm - and no one wants to be the person arguing 'hey, we've already fallen this far, what's a little more?' As C.S. Lewis said, (paraphrase) 'the only way to get back on the right path is to go back to the point you left it.' But here's the thing - we can't turn back the clock. Technology cannot be unmade (see: Nuclear Proliferation), and while court decisions and laws can be overturned, to do so regarding issues that have had the backing of the majority of society for so long a time requires a shift in social opinion so great that I don't know it will ever be accomplished.

What to do? I wish I knew. But let's be clear - the fact that we have fallen up until this point does not mean that we should continue to do so, even if reversing our direction appears impossible.

I doubt SSM advocates will pick up on this column as a rallying cry. It would require an admission that their cause is but a further degenerative of the norm - and no one wants to be the person arguing 'hey, we've already fallen this far, what's a little more?'

And yet, Andrew Sullivan has.

It's for these reasons that I find drawing the line at gay couples to be so morally troubling. Enforcing one rule for the majority and another rule for a tiny minority is so gratuitously unfair it runs the risk of being understood as pure prejudice.

Translation: 'it's immoral to fall so far, and yet not go all the way.'

Oh, good grief!
-- posted by Austin @ 10:18 AM (PermaLink/Comment) ¶