http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/660zypwj.asp?pg=1
Sorry, Scandanavia, not Sweden per se.
susie
Will same-sex marriage undermine the institution of marriage? It already has.The author seems to want us to believe that the decline in marriage would have ceased had gay marriages not been allowed. I see no support for this assertion in the article.More precisely, it has further undermined the institution. The separation of marriage from parenthood was increasing; gay marriage has widened the separation. Out-of-wedlock birthrates were rising; gay marriage has added to the factors pushing those rates higher.
Also see the talk about Norway.
Gay marriage is both an effect and a reinforcing cause of the separation of marriage and parenthood. In states like Sweden and Denmark, where out-of-wedlock birthrates were already very high, and the public favored gay marriage, gay unions were an effect of earlier changes. Once in place, gay marriage symbolically ratified the separation of marriage and parenthood. And once established, gay marriage became one of several factors contributing to further increases in cohabitation and out-of-wedlock birthrates, as well as to early divorce. But in Norway, where out-of-wedlock birthrates were lower, religion stronger, and the public opposed same-sex unions, gay marriage had an even greater role in precipitating marital decline.Kurtz gives no actual statistics to examine, nor does he tell us whether or not these trends were already increasing. He realizes that there is the question is whether gay marriage is a cause or an effect. He wants to believe it is both, but his reasoning doesn't really seem very strong to me.
However, I did find this paragraph interesting:
In stage one, cohabitation is seen as a deviant or avant-garde practice, and the vast majority of the population produces children within marriage. Italy is at this first stage. In the second stage, cohabitation serves as a testing period before marriage, and is generally a childless phase. Bracketing the problem of underclass single parenthood, America is largely at this second stage. In stage three, cohabitation becomes increasingly acceptable, and parenting is no longer automatically associated with marriage. Norway was at this third stage, but with recent demographic and legal changes has entered stage four. In the fourth stage (Sweden and Denmark), marriage and cohabitation become practically indistinguishable, with many, perhaps even most, children born and raised outside of marriage. According to Kiernan, these stages may vary in duration, yet once a country has reached a stage, return to an earlier phase is unlikely. (She offers no examples of stage reversal.) Yet once a stage has been reached, earlier phases coexist.IOW, marriage is not dead in these countries at all. It's doing just fine for those who want it.
Again, though, let me be clear about my position. I don't think the government should sanction gay marriages. I don't see a role for the government in marriage at all.