September 15th 2007

  Buy Issue 2764

Articles from this issue:

EDITORIAL: Horse flu: another quarantine scandal

COVER STORY: Howard and Rudd: the Xerox men

QUARANTINE: Taiwan farmers' lessons for Australia

WATER: Federal water plan could wipe 2.9 per cent off GDP

ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS: Sexual abuse of Aboriginal children: is Labor serious?

CANBERRA OBSERVED: Labor's cumbersome IR policy

INTERNET FILTERING: Teenager bypasses 'useless' Govt porn filter

DIVORCE LAWS: Aussie dads still in dark about family law changes

OPINION: Abortion: an unanswered question

STRAWS IN THE WIND: Surprise appointment / A country looted by its corrupt leaders / An exercise in Islamic compassion / Now for the good news

INTERNATIONAL TRADE: WTO's Doha round staggers to a stalemate

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS: Australia's uranium sale to India

AS THE WORLD TURNS: Toxic childhood

BOOKS: SACRED CAUSES: The Clash of Religion and Politics, by Michael Burleigh


Books promotion page

THE FUTURE OF MARRIAGE, by David Blankenhorn

by Bill Muehlenberg

News Weekly, September 15, 2007
Can we do without marriage?

by David Blankenhorn

(New York: Encounter Books)
Hardcover: 260 pages
Rec. price: AUD$50.00

David Blankenhorn is a world authority on the institution of marriage. One of the biggest debates concerning marriage today is whether we should expand the concept to include same-sex unions.

Blankenhorn thinks not, and in these 260 pages he sets out to make the "no" case against homosexual marriage. But he does so, pre-eminently, by making the "yes" case for the institution of heterosexual marriage.

He first seeks to get a handle on what marriage is, and then show how it has been experienced over the centuries. The first half of the book is about what marriage is, and how it has developed. The second half deals with the challenge of same-sex marriage.

Blankenhorn recognises that a definition of marriage is a slippery affair, but after a close examination of the issue and how others have thought about it, he comes up with this helpful conceptualisation:

"In all or nearly all human societies, marriage is socially approved sexual intercourse between a woman and a man, conceived both as a personal relationship and as an institution, primarily such that any children resulting from the union are - and are understood by society to be - emotionally, morally, practically, and legally affiliated with both of the parents."

In his overview of the history of marriage, he demonstrates what has been the universal belief about marriage. It reflects the fundamental idea: "for every child, a mother and a father".

Thus marriage is primarily about two things: the socially approved sexual intercourse between a woman and a man, and the protection and nurturing of the fruit of that relationship. Both are vital components of marriage, and must not be separated from it or from each other.

He argues that marriage is based on two universal and timeless basic rules: the rule of opposites (marriage is man-woman) and the rule of sex (marriage involves sexual intercourse). And even though it is difficult for moderns to get their head around this fact, sexual intercourse has always been about procreation, or at least its possibility.

Put at its simplest, "marriage is fundamentally about sex and reproduction". And children born into married households are greatly advantaged. As such, "Marriage is society's most pro-child institution." The research on how children fare in a two-parent household cemented by marriage is now voluminous. No other type of relationship is as good for children as heterosexual marriage. Family structure, in other words, matters overwhelmingly for children.

Furthermore, marriage is not just a private relationship; it is a public institution. Social institutions exist to meet fundamental human needs. The need for the institution of marriage arises because human beings are "sexually embodied creatures who everywhere reproduce sexually and give birth to helpless, socially-needy offspring who remain immature for long periods of time and who therefore depend on the love and support of both of the parents who brought them into existence".

So how does same-sex marriage fit into all this? First, it must be said that Blankenhorn is not unsympathetic to the arguments of homosexuals wanting marriage rights. He believes that basic human rights are important, and that all people must be treated with dignity. But he still believes that marriage is not something that can be redefined to include same-sex relationships.

In fact, some Christians may be uncomfortable with aspects of this book. Blankenhorn calls himself a Christian, but says that while he takes the Bible seriously on the issue of homosexuality, he disagrees with it on this point! He thinks we should not - and that Jesus would not - judge a person as "blameworthy just for being a gay or a lesbian".

But aside from this major concern, his arguments against homosexual marriage are quite good. He argues that homosexual marriage fundamentally means transforming the institution of marriage. Even the various international human rights documents of today speak of the right to participate in the institution of marriage, but they do not "recognise the right to turn marriage into another word for any private adult relationship of choice".

Given the intimate link between marriage and parenting, to change the institution of marriage is to change parenthood itself. Changing marriage changes marriage for everyone, and it will change parenthood for everyone.

But as the research keeps telling us, that will be bad news for children. Says Blankenhorn, every child in the world has a right to a name, a nationality, and a mother and father.

In addition to the de-institutionalisation of marriage, same-sex marriage would "require us in both law and culture to deny the double origin of the child." Says Blankenhorn, "I can hardly imagine a more serious violation."

Blankenhorn then goes on to list some 23 possible positive consequences of legalising same-sex unions, then lists 24 possible negative outcomes. He also offers 12 possible neutral outcomes. A major reason for all this is to demonstrate that this idea being proposed is a very big one indeed, with profound consequences.

Sexual orientation

To take only one example, if we accept the logic of same-sex marriage, how can we possibly oppose the logic of, say, bisexual, polyamorous marriage? If we can redefine marriage in terms of sexual orientation, "why not permit a bisexual woman to marry one man and one woman?"

The consequences of such a revolutionary change will be far-reaching and, at this point, perhaps unmeasur-able. But the changes will be monumental. Thus, we need to be very careful about how we proceed here.

Blankenhorn concludes by offering some recommendations as to how we might strengthen the institution of marriage. He acknowledges that the future of marriage is shaky at best. But, as a means of raising new citizens, marriage has never been equalled.

The message of this important book is that we dare not play fast and loose with the world's first, and most important, social institution.

Join email list

Join e-newsletter list

Your cart has 0 items

Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers

Trending articles

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE Memo to Shorten, Wong: LGBTIs don't want it

COVER STORY Shorten takes low road to defeat marriage plebiscite

COVER STORY Bill Shorten imposes his political will on the nation

COVER STORY Reaper mows down first child in the Low Countries

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE Kevin Andrews: defend marriage on principles

CANBERRA OBSERVED Coalition still gridlocked despite foreign success

ENVIRONMENT More pseudo science from climate

News and views from around the world

Menzies, myth and modern Australia (Jonathan Pincus)

China’s utterly disgraceful human-rights record

Japan’s cure for childlessness: a robot (Marcus Roberts)

SOGI laws: a subversive response to a non-existent problem (James Gottry)

Shakespeare, Cervantes and the romance of the real (R.V. Young)

That’s not funny: PC and humour (Anthony Sacramone)

Refugees celebrate capture of terror suspect

The Spectre of soft totalitarianism (Daniel Mahoney)

American dream more dead than you thought (Eric Levitz)

Think the world is overcrowded: These 10 maps show why you’re wrong (Max Galka)

© Copyright 2011
Last Modified:
November 14, 2015, 11:18 am