{"id":9783,"date":"2014-07-05T19:09:35","date_gmt":"2014-07-06T02:09:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/?p=9783"},"modified":"2014-07-09T12:43:26","modified_gmt":"2014-07-09T19:43:26","slug":"war-on-marriage-dissolving-the-institution-of-marriage","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/2014\/07\/war-on-marriage-dissolving-the-institution-of-marriage\/","title":{"rendered":"War on Marriage: Dissolving the Institution of Marriage"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Assault by Taylor Lewis –
\nThe very idea of marriage being between just a man and woman is offensive to radical leftists because it holds male and female as distinct creatures. For egalitarian libertines, that\u2019s a reality too horrid to survive in their utopia.<\/strong><\/p>\n

For years, opponents of same-sex marriage fretted that the unleashing of gay nuptials would open the door for all types of sexual decadence. Last presidential cycle, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum was panned heavily for comparing gay marriage to polygamy at a New Hampshire stop on the campaign trail. After a college student questioned his vigorous opposition to same sex couples being wed, Santorum responded<\/a> in turn: \u201cIf it makes three people happy to get married, based on what you just said, what makes that wrong?\u201d The remark was met with boos from students and condemnation from the liberal press.<\/p>\n

Less than two years later, Santorum ran a victory lap<\/a> after a federal judge struck down a ban on polygamy in Utah. The ruling didn\u2019t enshrine the right to polygamy in the state per se; it only held that polygamous individuals can\u2019t be discriminated against<\/a> under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. They still don\u2019t have the right to marry, but give it time. <\/p>\n

The judge\u2019s decision was easily predictable. Shortly before the Supreme Court struck down the federal non-recognition of same-sex marriages last summer, one liberal writer had already moved on<\/a> to advocating for legalized polygamy. The berating of conservative slippery-slope hysteria? Quickly forgotten for the sake of more freedom.<\/p>\n

The culture has largely accepted homosexuality. The next step is normalization.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Since at least the Reagan Era, the early proponents of same-sex marriage in America assured traditional folks that they only wanted the same monogamous love enjoyed by heterosexuals. Andrew Sullivan, the passionate gay marriage supporter who broke cultural and political barriers as head of the New Republic<\/em>, wrote in<\/a> 1989 that marriage \u201cprovides an anchor, if an arbitrary and weak one, in the chaos of sex and relationships to which we are all prone.\u201d It was this institution Sullivan wished to incorporate into gay life. While admitting that \u201cgay leadership clings to notions of gay life as essentially outsider, anti-bourgeois, radical\u201d he found being both \u201cgay\u201d and \u201cbourgeois\u201d to no longer be \u201can absurd proposition.\u201d<\/p>\n

Sullivan led the crusade for marriage \u201cequality\u201d long before the President thought it was cool<\/a> — and voter friendly — to endorse. His efforts, which are finally bearing fruit, are laudable, and I believe he was sincere in wanting gay marriage for the right reasons. Even so, I have the sneaking suspicion that much of the support for same-sex marriage isn\u2019t so much about bringing a neglected part of society into the fold, but rather tearing down what\u2019s viewed as an oppressive institution.<\/p>\n

By now, it\u2019s obvious gay marriage will soon be a reality across the United States. The culture has largely accepted homosexuality. The next step is normalization. From this growing trend, Ross Douthat of the New York Times<\/em> recently attempted<\/a> to negotiate the terms of surrender for social conservatives. As an orthodox Catholic, Douthat frets the self-righteousness of the pro-gay marriage crowd will eventually work itself into government policy that impedes on religious liberty. He quite reasonably asks for \u201cprotections for dissent.\u201d He didn\u2019t understand that asking for such shelter is like open-bleeding in an ocean of emaciated sharks. It\u2019s an invitation to attack.<\/p>\n

Anyone who questions what now goes for acceptable opinion on gay marriage is instantly an insufferable bigot that must be punished.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Mark Joseph Stern of Slate <\/em>immediately denounced<\/a> Douthat as homophobic while linking his religious beliefs to racism. It\u2019s not the first time<\/a> this pejorative has been thrown at the NYT <\/em>columnist. Douthat\u2019s carving out a place for religious beliefs won\u2019t be considered because there is to be no consideration. Anyone who questions what now goes for acceptable opinion on gay marriage is instantly an insufferable bigot that must be punished.<\/p>\n

This all leads to a recent piece<\/a> in the Daily Beast <\/em>by Jay Michaelson, a gay writer who favors same-sex marriage but is wary of a plot to undermine the institution. He notes that while \u201cwe now know that the sky doesn\u2019t fall when gays get married,\u201d there is validity to the \u201cconservative claim that gay marriage is changing, not just expanding, marriage.\u201d Michaelson describes this change as the \u201cChristian Right\u2019s nightmare\u201d because it eschews fidelity, and thus the sacred bond taken between man and wife. Should gay marriage become the norm, it will turn the institution into a \u201csex-positive, body-affirming compact\u201d with little regard to the spiritual aspect of man and woman becoming \u201cone flesh.\u201d He even goes as far as to note that polygamy and infidelity are widely acknowledged and accepted in the gay community.<\/p>\n

I suspect that has been the plan all along. It\u2019s not enough to gain the right to be married in a church. It\u2019s not even enough to agitate public opinion into such a frenzy that dissent becomes a hatred-driven treason against humanity. The end goal is the total annihilation of the bourgeois vision of marriage.<\/p>\n

Last fall, Dean Spade and Craig Willse, two lefty radical college professors, penned the treatise \u201cMarriage Will Never Set Us Free<\/a>\u201d arguing, among other things, that marriage is a tool of oppression and \u201clabor exploitation.\u201d Not only that, they averred marriage represents \u201cproperty\u201d and thus the unjust passing down the fruits of labor to progeny. And lastly, marriage is viewed by these hard-leftists as a \u201cpatriarchal, sexist institution\u201d used by governments as a \u201ctool of social control.\u201d<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t doubt governments use the institution of marriage to regulate family life. But that\u2019s not the point. As a metaphysical matter, the union between a man and woman before God is meant to sacralize the participation in creation — the transcendental act of love which creates a child. It exists to hallow what religious scholar Mircea Eliade describes as \u201cthe union of heaven and earth.\u201d Since elitist progressives don\u2019t have much reverence for the Divine, they ignore that matter altogether. In their eyes marriage is just a contract that has all types of historic injustice attached.<\/p>\n

The very idea of marriage being between just a man and woman is offensive to radical leftists because it holds male and female as distinct creatures.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

The push to absolve marriage and achieve a society of free love is right on a par with other leftist causes. The goal is virtually always the same: a world unrestricted by traditional norms that temper public behavior. They wish to tear down the caste system enforced through social ostracization, and achieve a society where anything goes. The very idea of marriage being between just a man and woman is offensive to radical leftists because it holds male and female as distinct creatures. For egalitarian libertines, that\u2019s a reality too horrid to survive in their utopia.<\/p>\n

Those who understand marriage as a transcendental institution understand that same-sex unions are a contradiction. They are, as Catholic University of America professor Michael Hanby puts it<\/a>, \u201contologically impossible.\u201d By its very nature, marriage can\u2019t be between two men or two women. If marriage means loving consent between any two, or three, or various numbers of people, it loses almost all meaning. The law of diminishing marginal returns kicks in, and that which was once sacred turns into something everyday and common.<\/p>\n

None of this is to say gay individuals don\u2019t have the right to be wed by someone who consents to perform the ceremony. They have the right to do as they please, so long as it doesn\u2019t inflict harm on anyone else. But calling something \u201cmarriage\u201d doesn\u2019t necessarily make it marriage.\u201d Many gay people I know personally don\u2019t wish to rock the boat of Western Civilization. They want the ideal of heterosexual couples: a loving, monogamous relationship and a white-picket fence. Then again, I don\u2019t associate much with the Ivory Tower-types who long to destroy basic virtue.<\/p>\n

The progressive reformation of our world is meant to liberate us from the kind of liberty-fostering order that is necessary for human flourishing.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

In the end, there is a great fear among supporters of traditional marriage: how the lower and middle classes react when unchained from moral obligations. The elites will always be able to take care of themselves, no matter the sexual dalliances they engaged in. That\u2019s the added benefit of having a plump bank account. Everyone else, on the other hand, is much more susceptible to financial distress and crumpling personal lives. The kind of order created through marriage — whether it be fidelity to spouse or the framework to focus on rearing children \u2013 is empowering when compared to the hedonistic tendencies that lend themselves to a lack of productivity.<\/p>\n

So is there a grand conspiracy against marriage? Yes; just as there is a grand conspiracy against capitalism, privacy, liberty, and basic decency. Since social movements are primarily driven by intellectuals<\/a>, normal people advocating for gay marriage aren\u2019t necessarily aware of the cause in which they are so entwined. They are blissfully ignorant of the puppeteers operating behind the scenes.<\/p>\n

The conspiracy is afoot. Slowly, progressives are coming out and acknowledging their true agenda. The progressive reformation of our world is meant to liberate us from the kind of liberty-fostering order that is necessary for human flourishing. If achieved, it will only implant a myopic culture incapable of recognizing goodness or truth outside superficial desires. It\u2019s a frightening notion, and one that shouldn\u2019t be ignored.<\/p>\n

HT: American Thinker<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Taylor Lewis – The very idea of marriage being between just a man and woman is offensive to radical leftists because it holds male and female as distinct creatures. For egalitarian libertines, that\u2019s a reality too horrid to survive in their utopia. For years, opponents of same-sex marriage fretted that the unleashing of gay … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":497,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"generate_page_header":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[103,95,72,142,15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-9783","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-christian-bashing","category-homosexual-indoctrination","category-leftism","category-leftist-tyranny","category-moral-issues"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9783","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/497"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9783"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9783\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9783"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9783"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9783"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}