Reason Magazine

Print|Email|Single Page

Opening Marriage

Do same-sex unions pave the way for polygamy?

(Page 2 of 2)

Boaz confirms that he would indeed favor such a limitation. "Two people seems like a good number for a marriage," he says. "People should be allowed to make just about any contracts they want among themselves. But the laws that relate to 'marriage' reflect society's desire to support marriage as an element of stability in social order and the raising of children." For that purpose, he believes, the government has a right to place some restrictions on which contracts it will recognize as marriages -- at least as long as special laws related to marriage continue to exist.

But that brings us back to square one in the gay marriage debate: Recognizing the legality of a marriage implies its endorsement by society. A partial deregulation of marriage is unlikely to satisfy either conservatives or libertarians. But then, true privatization of marriage would likely generate furious opposition as well. Conservatives would see it as the final destruction of the family. Meanwhile, many advocates of same-sex marriage would no doubt feel that the marriage rights they had won were reduced to an empty prize. They might even suspect that the heterosexual majority was willing to destroy the institution of marriage rather than open it to gays.

Whatever the philosophical merits of such a proposal, the chances of privatizing marriage in the foreseeable future are virtually nil. Far from being depoliticized, marriage is likely to remain a major battlefield in the culture wars.

Page: 12

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.

Pingback| 12.13.09 @ 3:03PM

If a Kitten Ever Got the Chance, He’d Eat You and Everyone You Care About « Notes Fro links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…Why limit the number to two?  Why limit the participants to non-relatives?  At some point, subjecting these concerns to strict, abstract logic, we would be forced to  just dump the whole institution.  Fine, say many libertarians, over-concerned with reducing all manner of human life to mathematical proof.  But this is not fine with the vast majority.  And it never will be, if I may offer a prognostication.  A successful…

nfl jerseys|11.8.10 @ 4:00AM|

hjedtgt

دردشة|1.27.11 @ 5:01AM|

Thank you, my dear on this important topic You can also browse my site and I am honored to do this site for songs
http://www.a6rbna.com
This website is for travel to Malaysia
http://www.m-arabi.com

ماليزيا|2.19.11 @ 5:41AM|

in general it is ok

دردشة عراقنا |4.25.11 @ 4:59PM|

thnx u man

حجز فنادق مكة|5.7.11 @ 11:21AM|

thanks alot

شوق ليموزين|5.16.11 @ 7:33AM|

thank you

دردشة عراقية|8.8.11 @ 9:45PM|

thanx

منتديات العراق|8.15.11 @ 8:10PM|

thanks

http://www.forums.iraqn.com/

Leave a Comment

More Articles by Cathy Young

Related Articles (Deregulation, Gay/Lesbian Issues)

advertisements

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptions

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:


(310) 367-6109

Editorial & Production Offices:

3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245