Brief Analysis of the Key Issues in
Whether
to Legalize Same-Sex Marriage in Maine
What is truly at stake for our state and for society
Whether to radically redefine marriage by allowing same-sex individuals to marry is developing into one of the most significant questions to ever face the citizens of Maine. It is an emotional debate on both sides. As a result, too often the potential impacts on society are ignored. Fortunately, we can adequately evaluate these potential impacts. In this effort, we can look at the social science research findings, combined with the clear lessons of history across cultures and over the millennia that demonstrate the importance of preserving man/woman marriage and apply some basic Yankee common sense. Virtually all who do this quickly conclude that legalizing same-sex marriage would result in significant net harm to our state and to our society as a whole.
The fundamental dangers of legalizing same-sex marriage stem from the fact that it would radically redefine a social institution that has been a foundation of societies across cultures and over the millennia. To understand why this is significant, it is first necessary to understand the definition of a “social institution” and its role in a society.
A “social institution” is the network of shared meanings, norms, definitions, expectations and understandings held by the members of a society. It is what guides and governs how society members believe they should act and interact with each other. It sets the standards for what is commonly agreed is socially desirable and legitimate behavior and ideals. Major social institutions include the family, marriage, a military or defense system, a governmental system, religious tradition and others. A society is essentially the sum of its unique social institutions and their interactions over time. One of the things any successful society must accomplish is to inculcate these shared meanings, definitions, norms, expectations and understandings into the rising generation—a process called “socialization.”
With this basic understanding of the role of social institutions, it is easy to understand that there cannot be two competing and contradictory institutions of marriage in any society. That is, if same-sex individuals are allowed to “marry,” the current social institution of marriage, which is defined as only the union of a man and a woman, will be completely replaced. The result would be to create a new social institution, which may still be called “marriage,” but one that is radically different from the current social institution of marriage, which is primarily child centered. The new social institution of marriage would, by definition, be primarily adult centered because it is biologically impossible for two same-sex individuals to have children together.
Does that matter to society? Would it harm society?
Based on the social science research, the lessons of history and just plain common sense, the answers are almost certainly “yes” to both questions. The reasoning for reaching these conclusions is laid out in what is often called the “social institution/social goods” defense of man/woman marriage. It is the argument that has persuaded most appellate courts in the U.S. that have heard challenges to laws limiting marriage to only a man and a woman to uphold them. Those few that have ruled to legalize same-sex marriage have had to consciously ignore this reasoning. Links to articles and other resources that explain this defense in more detail can be found on the “additional resources” page on this Web site.
However, the social institution/social goods defense of man/woman marriage is that it provides a number of proven “social goods” or social benefits to society largely because it is the essential anchor of the natural family. These benefits have been conclusively documented by social science research. This research shows that children do best on every measure of welfare when they are reared by their married, biological parents.
Historical experience shows that these social goods cannot be provided as effectively, if at all, by any other means. Is that important to society? Absolutely. It is critical because children are the future of any society. Children are the primary reason that societies promote and protect man/woman marriage. By legalizing same-sex marriage, a new and completely untested social institution of marriage would be created. Because same-sex couples cannot produce children, that new institution would no longer be primarily child centered. Instead, it would become little more than a mechanism to give official governmental recognition to any two individuals who profess affection for each other and for bestowing economic and other benefits to them based on that affection alone.
There is absolutely no assurance that this radically redefined new institution of “genderless marriage” would or even could provide the same benefits to society as the current institution of marriage. Rather, there are disturbing indications being seen in places where same-sex marriage has already been legalized that it does not provide the same benefits to society as man/woman marriage. And if it cannot or does not provide benefits, there would be very real costs to society. Again, we get some idea of what the societal costs might be from just an economic perspective by looking at the costs to society from the family fragmentation that is already occurring as a result of other factors in society. One comprehensive study conservatively estimated that family fragmentation costs U.S. taxpayers at least $112 billion a year. It costs Maine taxpayers at least $214 million a year at the state and local level. A link to this study is provided here. The social dynamics driving family fragmentation are minor compared to radically redefining the fundamental institution of marriage in our society, so it is reasonable to expect the costs of legalizing same-sex marriage would be even greater.
To understand the potential impact of legalizing same-sex marriage it is important to keep foremost in mind that it is mostly about children. The reason that societies create, promote and protect a social institution that binds men to the mother of their children and to the children themselves is because of the resulting benefits to society. The social institution of man/woman marriage shapes the rising generation, and therefore sets the course for a society’s future and even determines whether it will survive. This is why societies have regulated who can marry. Siblings cannot marry each other, for example. There is no unlimited “right” to marry.
It is also easy to understand why there is no “right” to marry, either a civil right or a right as a matter of fairness. Societies have always regulated marriage for the benefit of society, including who could marry and even how marriages come about. Brothers and sisters cannot marry, for example. In many societies, marriages are still arranged, a mechanism that these societies have found to be most beneficial.
In fact, the enduring institution over time of arranged marriages in many societies helps put the child-centered role of marriage in even clearer perspective. Marriage is not mostly about love, but about the fact that any society is never more than a couple of generations away from extinction. While romantic love between individuals is a positive element in society, when it produces children who may not be properly cared for and reared to become productive members of that society, it can result in societal harm. Hence, the enduring nature of marriage in human society and the objective at its core of encouraging that sexual relations between men and women take place only within its boundaries. It has proven to be the best way to ensure that any children who might be born as the result of a sexual union have the best prospects for their protection, nurture and rearing.
Whatever deemphasizes the importance of marriage to the rising generation or confuses them about the nature of that social institution weakens society. If people believe it is only about “love” and that government recognizes this expression of love with various privileges and acclaim and rewards it with economic benefits, what does that say to the rising generation? And if the government tells young people that either a mother or a father is not important in a child’s optimal development, what signal does that send? Clearly, neither serves society’s larger interests. Yet, legalizing same-sex marriage does both.
Because marriage is a fundamental social institution that has such an important role in shaping rising generations, it will take time to determine the damage that will result from radically changing it. This is why someone who claims that there is no negative impact because after just a few years, “the sky has not fallen” in Massachusetts as a result of legalizing same-sex marriage, they are merely showing their ignorance about how societies work. It will take at least one generation and probably two before the true impact to society of legalizing same-sex marriage will be known. By the time the true extent of the damage can be assessed, it will almost certainly be too late to reverse it because the radically redefined institution of genderless marriage will have been accepted “as normal” by society. This is the way social institutions, socialization and societies work.
It is this fundamental dynamic of social institutions and how they work, and the near impossibility of reversing any damage that will occur if a critical social institution is redefined that requires that those who are advocating such a change bear the burden of proof that doing so will not result in net harm to society. This is the only rational way to make public policy. To do otherwise is to literally argue, “We do not know if there would be any harm to society from taking this action, and we cannot refute the data that strongly suggest that there would be such harm, but we are demanding that society do it anyway.” (For a more detailed discussion of why the burden of proof must rest squarely on those advocating change, click here.
In effect, legalizing same-sex marriage would make our children, grandchildren and future generations guinea pigs in a massive social experiment that is irreversible.
Finally, any full debate must also recognize that legalizing same-sex marriage will have an impact on all other social institutions, with many of the consequences unpredictable and unanticipated. No social institution functions in isolation. All are constantly interacting. A good example of these less obvious consequences and impacts is the negative effect it would have on freedom of religion. Several analyses of how it would undermine this fundamental freedom are posted on our “additional resources” page.
We in Maine do not have to undertake this social experiment ourselves to determine what the harm would be. Wisely or unwisely, other countries, including our neighbors in Canada, have already launched themselves into such an experiment. We have the advantage of waiting a generation or two to access their experience before we decide whether to so radically redefine the present institution of marriage ourselves. This is the only rational, prudent and responsible course.
A major reason why the Marriage Facts Maine Coalition was formed by concerned groups and individuals in our state is to force anyone who advocates legalizing same-sex marriage to meet the burden of proof that doing so will not harm society as a whole. This debate on the legalization of same-sex marriage must include full consideration of these social realities independent of any argument based on values or moral grounds from either side. We are convinced that the proponents of legalizing same-sex marriage cannot meet this burden of proof. If they cannot, then the value-based arguments they make that it should be legalized in the name of “equity,” “tolerance” or some other value are clearly trumped by the greater need to protect the future of society and to do what is best for the vast majority of its members.
This site is a resource providing further information and analysis on this non-moral non-religious, social institution/social goods case for marriage. We encourage you to utilize it and then to urge your elected representatives not to legalize same-sex marriage in Maine. You can easily and quickly do this through a special feature we have set up on this Web site. Click here.
We also encourage you to sign up for our periodic updates and action alerts on the same-sex marriage issue in Maine. Click here.