Do We Need a Redefinition of Modern Marriage?

By

Sherman N. Miller

Same sex marriage discussions can conjure up passionate disdain for the homosexual lifestyle. The Massachusetts and New Jersey Supreme Court rulings coupled with the acceptance of same-sex clergy in the Episcopal Church are forcing the plight of the same-sex couples to the front burner in the national debate on marriage. Some heterosexual people appear to have serious worry that the homosexual lifestyle is gaining mainstream legitimacy, so they want to squelch the idea before it gains a base.

I chatted with some late fifty-and early sixty-something Christians to get their view on the symbolism of the New Jersey Supreme Court same sex ruling. One of these persons is known to take some liberal stances on issues. Yet they all displayed disdain towards the idea of having same-sex marriage legitimated. One chap argued that there are legal things that need to be resolved as inheritance rights, but he felt that same sex relationships should be called anything expect marriage. Another chap argued that Europe and Japan are dying today because people stopped having children.

I asked the group if we are forcing our Judo-Christian beliefs on people who may be atheists or agnostics who might accept same-sex relationships? They did not move from their conservative religious positions. It was clear that although we claim not to believe in a state religion America is really underpinned by Christian values. 

In light of the New Jersey same sex ruling, Reverend Dr. Peter Bramble of New York, an Episcopal priest, was asked to share his feelings on the acceptance of same-sex clergy relationships in the American Episcopal Church. He declared, “The Episcopal Church is an agent of the devil!” He sees himself as an Orthodox Episcopalian who wants no part of same sex marriage in the clergy.

Reverend Bramble passionately argued that marriage is between a man and a woman and sex should produce a child. He saw same sex relationships as selfish because they offered gratification to the two people involved but they do not produce the next generation. 

Reverend Bramble poured forth, “The sperm dies and no child comes from it! A man shouldn’t sleep with another man. I just don’t believe in it.”  Then he ardently worried aloud over the disappearance of the United States when same-sex partners started to die out leaving no children because he felt that people are unwilling to make the sacrifice to parent the next generation.

In pondering changes in the laws to allow same sex marriage, the obvious question becomes, “Should polygamy also be legitimated because de facto polygamy may already be today’s underground marital paradigm in some sectors of the nation?” The U.S. Census Bureau reported on Percent of Households That are Married–Couple Families: 2005.  We marveled at fewer than 50 percent (49.7 percent) of the households are married. However, what was not highlighted was that Washington, DC had only 21.8 percent of the household married.

Do we look at DC as a model of tomorrow’s marital direction for US households? If the DC marital direction is a prelude of tomorrow, then both issues of same sex marriage and de facto polygamy need be included in the national debate of a redefinition of the modern marriage. On the other hand, the definition of marriage has stood the test of hundreds of years; so I am not personally convinced that there is sufficient need to redefine it now.

Return