Posted on 06/21/2004 9:06:30 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback
Note: This commentary was delivered by Prison Fellowship President Mark Earley.
As America moves closer to embracing same-sex “marriage,” one can almost picture people in the wedding industry rubbing their hands in delight. After all, if we legalize gay “marriage,” we’ll have more weddings than ever, right?
Wrong. We will end up having fewer marriages, not more. Just ask the citizens of Holland, where marriage is going the way of typewriters and buggy whips.
In the Weekly Standard, Stanley Kurtz, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, points out that in recent decades—a time when parental cohabitation was sweeping across Northern Europe—the Dutch clung to the last, ragged remains of their religious traditions. Yes, they engaged in cohabitation—but when Dutch couples had children, they usually got married.
Not anymore. During the mid-1990s, the rate of out-of-wedlock births began to shoot up. By 2003, the rate of increase nearly doubled to 31 percent of all Dutch births.
What accounts for this phenomenon? Gay “marriage.” These were the years, Kurtz notes, “when the debate over the legal recognition of gay relationships came to the fore in the Netherlands.” The debate came to an end when Holland legalized full same-sex “marriage” in the year 2000.
The conjunction of these two social phenomena, says Kurtz, is no coincidence. During Holland’s decade-long drive to legalize same-sex “marriage,” gay advocates openly scorned the idea that marriage ought to be defined by the possibility of childbearing. Love between two partners—any two partners—was the real basis of marriage. Thus, as one gay “marriage” advocate told the Dutch Parliament, “there is absolutely no reason, objectively, to distinguish between heterosexual and homosexual love.” Dutch leaders bought this argument. Marriage would be reduced to—as Kurtz put it—“just one choice on a menu of relationship options.” In marriage, as with cheeseburgers, you could have it your way.
Then a funny thing happened on the road to redefining marriage: Dutch people simply stopped getting married—even when they had children. This really ought to come as no surprise. After all, Kurtz writes, “Spend a decade telling people that marriage is not about parenthood, and they just might begin to believe you. Make relationship equality a rallying cry, and people might decide that all forms of relationships are equal.”
The ease with which the Dutch jettisoned marriage happened in large part because the Dutch had already abandoned their Judeo-Christian heritage. The few religious voices raised in defense of traditional marriage were drowned out. And as a result Holland is now going the way of Scandinavia—where acceptance of gay “marriage” has led to the continued deterioration of marriage.
What’s happening in the Netherlands gives us clear evidence of what gay “marriage” does: People stop getting married, and children suffer. Let this serve as a warning to Americans. Marriage between one man and one woman must be protected and strengthened. If it isn’t, then American families—already deeply damaged by divorce and illegitimacy—will be destroyed.
BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
What children? Gay marriage is the next step down the road to demographic death. I can guarantee that in Holland under Sharia law there will be no more gay marriage.
I can't say that Gay marriage was the root cause for this.
Consider, for example, I live with a girlfriend (we either have, or do not have kids) and I chose to move on. Without marriage, there are no legal loopholes. I just move on with my life. With marriage, we now begin discussions concerning alimony, my house is no longer 100% mine, my income is not 100% mine, my possessions are no longer mine.
So, why would any sane man get married?
I think the Dutch are being intolerant, since they don't yet sanction polygamous marriages. If two men and three women want to enter into a living relationship, who are we to say that there is something wrong with that?
Silly Hodar. You sound as if you're in favor of Liberty! Shocking, I say, just shocking. A decent man would WANT the government dictating the details of his personal life and finances. < /s>
How about a person and their pet?
EXACTLY what I told Kati yesterday - counterfeit marriage devalues real marriage just as counterfeit money devalues real money.
Well, it is easy to see why you aren't married, and probably shouldn't be.
Leafing through your statement, I count four "I"s, three "my"s, three "mine"s, and only two "we"s.
So, you have a point. This is not just about gay marriage. It's sometimes a lot more about "me".
Oh, yea, another pundit proliferating Stanley Kurtz' junk science.
Gay marriage and feminism (which created the fascist regime with regard to divorces that we have today in the US) go hand in hand. Both aim to pervert the traditional meaning of marriage, at the expense of children.
The article makes it clear that the comparison is between Holland with lots of hetero co-habitation and Holland with gay marriage. Here's the pertinent section:
In the Weekly Standard, Stanley Kurtz, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, points out that in recent decades—a time when parental cohabitation was sweeping across Northern Europe—the Dutch clung to the last, ragged remains of their religious traditions. Yes, they engaged in cohabitation—but when Dutch couples had children, they usually got married.He's not saying, "Fifty years ago, Dutch couples got married a lot, and now those gay people ruined it." To believe that people have been shacking up for 30 years and then suddenly it dawns on them that they don't have to get married when they have a kid...That's a big stretch to say the least. Let's also note that the same thing happened in Scandinavia: Co-habitation went along roughly with the rest of Europe, and so did marriage rates, until there was legalized gay marriage, and then the marriage rate dropped like a stone.Not anymore. During the mid-1990s, the rate of out-of-wedlock births began to shoot up. By 2003, the rate of increase nearly doubled to 31 percent of all Dutch births.
So, why would any sane man get married?
Why would any sane woman risk having sex (especially on a regular basis) with a man who has expressed the views you have? If she ends up pregnant, you "just move on with your life" and she ends up holding the bag? Not even paying child support?
As a psycho-analyst, you failed miserably.
I am married, and happily so for many years.
Where you failed, was in thinking ourside of your personal 'box'. Think as someone else would, NOT as you would. You may view marriage as a team effort to raise children, but not everyone does.
Considering the legal ramifications of a 'legal' marriage, especially in Europe; why would any sane man give away his possessions, income and decision making capabilities, when he can simply move in with his girlfriend and recieve his 'benefits' without legal ramifications? Worst case scenario of this, is child support.
So, what does he avoid? Well, how about paying his ex-wife alimony until she either dies, or marries some other schmuck? She can move in with another boyfriend, and stil recieve YOUR alimony, the payments only end when she decides to marry another. How about actually keeping the home he bought/earned/inhereted before he even met her? How about avoiding paying child support for kids she had with a previous husband/boyfriend?
Not all marriages last, and not all marriages SHOULD last. Making a marriage work requires active participation from both parties. Some couples either decide not to work together, or a single member decides to abandon it. But, either way; the MAN is the one who foots the financial and property damages. So again, why would any sane man chose to legally limit his life?
Don't forget the right to marry your dog. Do they still have dogs in Holland, or are they considered some sort of "assault weapon"?
Please read closely. You are putting words in my mouth, and I have not done so to you.
I have never said that he should neglect his legal responsibities (that would be child support), I said he would logically LIMIT his legal responsibilities.
Now for the personal attacks section, please grow up.
My statement is that pointing to Gay Marriage and saying 'That is the cause' is pre-mature. Other social structures have changed, for example pre-maritial sex is now socially acceptable, where it was much less accepted 40 years ago.
I realize that Holdar was presenting a hypothetical question, and that he would not be so irresponsible or immature as to live with a "girlfriend" and have children, sign mortgages, lease cars, buy insurance and invest jointly.
Only a moment's consideration of these circumstances would reveal the disarray this would cause in a civilization so irrational and muddled.
We all sign contracts for a myriad of transactions...and we live up to them or we resolve them in court.
I cannot imagine making the most serious commitment I could make in my business or personal life without a contract. Sure it would be fun to get laid for awhile, until the new fades - just like with a car - and then move on like a dog looking for one more bitch in heat.
Do you not see how this reduces us to the level of the most basic animal practices?
I am no saint. But I commited to a girl, told her then and tell her now:
"I will NEVER leave. Our marriage will not be dissolved...unless my life or the childrens' lives are in danger. (And even then divorce would be the last act.)
For a stable society, I believe it is the only way. And again, for a stable society, these marital transactions should only be between a male and female.
Two men or two women may form business partnerships. This is recognized by law. However these business partnerships should never be recognized as a social or religious contract, accepted by society as marriage.
That's really good, I'm going to steal it!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.