The Inevitability of "Gay Marriage"

Is "gay marriage" inevitable? I think so. The opposition to it is slowly lessening nation wide (though one must be cautious when interpreting opinion polls--even gay marriage advocates point out that the favorable numbers are skewed somewhat because some people do not want to admit their opposition to gay marriage, except in the voting booth). Nevertheless, the numbers appear to be shifting.

Why wouldn't they? Several factors are converging.

One, religion is slowly becoming less influential of people's behaviors. Most major world religions have traditionally viewed marriage as heterosexual. Some have factions within them that are changing but overall that doesn't matter--people are becoming more secular in their decision-making and lifestyle.

Two, academia and the media are disproportionately sympathetic to the gay/lesbian movement and they are two of the largest influences on a rising generation's world view. It is very difficult to find a TV show or movie that portrays a gay character in a negative light, unless there are other gay characters who are the heroes and most enlightened characters. Gay characters are everywhere, and are either portrayed as being above average in positive characteristics or are not commented on at all. Textbooks gloss over critical analysis of issues such as homosexual parenting and gay/lesbian permissive lifestyles--but continue to critique traditional marriage for its allegedly inherent gender imbalances and dangerous patriarchy.

Three, people who are less than completely sympathetic to gay issues are quickly labeled as ignorant, bigoted, religious nut-jobs, or evil. Who wants to be on the receiving end of that? Similarly, other catchy terms such as "marriage equality" are being thrown about (as if sexual orientation has ever disqualified someone from getting married)--who dares be against "equality"?!

Four, people are more highly attuned to civil rights and social justice these days--many are very compassionate and trying to be open-minded and inclusive. These motives are typically factors in embracing differences, and some very well-intentioned people will embrace the gay movement the way they would embrace civil liberties for racial minorities. Additionally, the increased acceptance of homosexuality has made it more likely that people know someone who is openly gay--and since that person is likely not a monster, and may even be a terrific human being, it becomes more difficult to separate the feelings toward a particular person and comprehensions about social institutions created to serve the greater good of a society. "How could Bob and Sam hurt my marriage? Who am I to judge?!" (in which case all laws against anything deemed deviant by society would be unjustly judgmental)

Five, people these days find it increasingly difficult to think about marriage as a social institution. They do not think about the role marriage plays in society--they see it as basically an issue of rights and freedom, or of simple romantic expression (as if allowing marriage is the only way to let adults love each other). It has become more subjective than in times past, and much more romanticized. It has become largely about personal gratification and less about a means of social organization and connection. Why deny someone the right to experience personal joy? When people are prone to frame the issue in such a way, those who try to answer based on the same premise will have difficulty coming to anything other than a sympathetic conclusion--they won't have much context for an impetus to challenge the premise upon which that question is based.

In short, how can those who believe that maintaining traditional definitions of marriage is best for society compete for the hearts and minds of the rising generation? I'm frankly surprised that there is as much opposition as there is (which goes to show that those who make what we view on TV are more sympathetic to gay issues than the average viewer--at least for now; opinion polls constantly reveal more moderate or conservative thinking on issues than demonstrated by TV/Movie characters and the majority of talking heads). There can be no doubt that there are concerted efforts to increase sympathy for gay issues via mainstream media. And why not? For the reasons I identified above, many see no reason not to do so, and in fact believe it is their moral obligation to do so as a means to free an oppressed people. Though such assumptions are questionable in some ways--but also understandable--that doesn't change the point that it's happening, and building momentum that will probably not be turned back. In fact, it is difficult for one critical of such efforts to even blame those involved in pushing the agenda--at least some of them--because they have no basis for understanding why it might have negative social effects, and they believe they are demonstrating compassion (and in fact are doing so--at least toward some, though perhaps at the expense of others for generations to come). Why should they think otherwise--hardly anyone is making the case--or at least getting a legitimized platform on which to make them.

Some trying to make the case actually hurt the case--they hold to simple religious traditions for their own sake and come across as pushing their religion on others. There are plenty of good secular and non-secular reasons to be hesitant about gay marriage and gay parenting (which will go hand in hand--a key reason some are concerned), but most of the soundbites the media presents of the opposition are just the simple anti-gay sounding platitudes of simplistic reasoning (which for some may be the only basis for their opposition because they too are part of a culture affected by the trends mentioned above and do not understand the potential social ramifications of changes to the institution of marriage). In effect, the poor arguments emboldens more sympathy for gay marriage.

The rising generation will not even fathom why one might oppose gay marriage. They will chalk it up to simple bigotry--"people used to own slaves, used to segregate schools and bus seating, used to be against interracial marriage, used to think the world was created in six days and that every word of the Bible was literal...and they used to be anti-marriage-equality. Isn't it nice how we've progressed?" They may be correct in the end--society may not continue to break down; it may foster stronger family bonds; and more parents will choose to stay in their committed relationships and take care of their children. Or, things will have deteriorated even more quickly as the links between parenthood and marriage undergoes a radical divide with a seemingly subtle (to those who think marriage is just about love--which has never been the case) change in the definition of marriage.

It would be nice to see if some in favor of "gay marriage" are as open-minded as some of those against it. Are they able to appreciate why some who are hesitant about gay marriage are not simply mean, ignorant, or religiously brainwashed. That would be a risky acknowledgment to make because it could invite the same stereotypical assumptions to be thrown at them that get applied to those concerned with protecting traditional marriage.