In the News: Government has no reason to deny gay marriage

from Iowa State Daily.

It seems like every time I read about this topic, an organization like the National Organization of Marriage or the Family Leader (led by Iowa’s own Bob Vander Plaats) has some illogical reasoning for denying marriage to homosexuals. Be it religion, sanctity of marriage, reproduction or that it should be up for popular vote, none of them make sense.

Let’s start with religion. I was raised a Lutheran and when the discussion comes up with my mother, this is often the first reason raised. Putting aside that most religions teach that people should be open and accepting to those who are different and/or outcasts in society, there is absolutely no reason that this should be considered.

The government isn’t in the business of endorsing a religion. Look at the First Amendment if you’re unclear on that point. If religion is the purpose for the government denying marriage, it is in violation of the First Amendment. If the government allows gay marriage, they do not force any religion or church to recognize it. Religions are free to do as they please, as they always have. It simply enables homosexuals to freely exercise their ability to get married without being unduly interfered with by a religion that may not be their own.

The sanctity of marriage doesn’t hold up well either. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for every 1,000 persons in the United States in 2009, there were 6.8 marriages and 3.4 divorces. So for every two marriages, there was one divorce. Sacred as a cow in India, isn’t it?

No-fault divorces have existed since 1969, when it was first enacted into state law in California. They’re available in every state now and require only a single petitioner to dissolve the marriage, without having to show a reason for the divorce. With laws like that on the books, no claim of “sanctity” can stand. Not when you can go to Vegas, get married after a night of drinking and divorced the next day for a few bucks and no reason.

Even if you could call the institution of marriage sanctimonious, the government has no reason to preserve that. It only must act in its best interest and the interest of those it governs. The government has an interest to treat all of its citizens equally and to promote a high standard of living for all of its citizens, and this would go a long way toward that objective.

Now, it’s no secret that gay couples can’t (naturally) reproduce. But that isn’t the point of marriage, nor is it the sole reason why the government extends benefits to married couples. If it were, then having kids would be a requirement for marriage. But many couples decide not to get married for a multitude of reasons. There would be no reason to recognize marriage after children were grown either. That would be a fun discussion to have with my grandparents, whose last child moved out nearly 30 years ago.

Read the full article from the Iowa State Daily.
Read more In the News.