Thursday, June 19, 2014

Social conservatives hold "March for Marriage" near Capitol

Today, the Washington Times carried a full magazine insert called “March for Marriage: Will you stand?”  The online link is here.

Apparently, the march went around the Capitol on the north side.

I used to go to a lot of marches to film the demonstrations.  Today, I had a film (“Silenced”) to go to with AFI_Docs, about whistleblowing, which I think TWT would like anyway, and reviewed on the Movies blog.  I’ve been spending more time recently trying to get my fiction and screenplays ready for prime time, along with making out of town trips, so I’m not as likely to go to demonstrations to take gawk photos.
You ask, whose shoes do I walk in?  Not these.  I still wonder, well, no one is interfering with “your” right to marry.  It’s all about how you pose the argument. 
I think the honest truth goes something like this:  lifelong, monogamous heterosexual marriage, producing and raising children, is hard.  It’s costly.  If it’s regarded as an afterthought, fewer people will even try to do it. 
This gets into emotional, psychological areas as well as financial.  This isn’t just about personal responsibility in the usual sense, even on Southpark.
The biggest issue about marriage seems to be the idea that people who don’t get married and raise children in a traditional way should stand ready to make sacrifices for those who do. 
I also have to say that when I have contemplated starting a relationship, I had no desire for legal validation of the relation.  In fact, that would get in the way.   But if the relationship is supposed to last several decades and produce and raise another generation, that changes the perspective around. 
Why are those defending an “exclusive” position on traditional marriage so attached to the idea that conventional heterosexual intercourse, nominatively capable of procreation, must occur to legitimize the arrangement?  The complementarity of heterosexual marriage must be viewed by them as another challenge, and something needs to be made of it publicly so that it works at all, It seems.

Dr. Mark Smith, OCU president, writes "Christian Marriage Is Beautiful" but Thomas G. Walsh, of the Universal Peace Federation International, comes closer to the mark when he talks about family as creating "social capital" for others.  Of course, this sounds like Rick Santorum (which a touch of Charles Murray), but he seems to point to a staged process:  family creates a structure where people learn altruistic love for others beyond just their scope of choice.  But they often stumble over the question over whether "to take care of their own" first.  You don't need to be focused on intercourse (as chosen behavior that generates primary interpersonal responsibilities) to get into this    
No question, though, Will and Sonny, if they existed in real life and not just in a soap opera, really would make great parents for Arianna. 

No comments: