More Unforeseen Consequences of Gay MarriagePosted: May 16, 2015
In response to this WSJ article, one Andy Webb wrote recently on Facebook –
The Law of Unintended Consequences or the Unintended Consequences of the Law?: This is fascinating: One of the arguments used to press for the legalization of gay marriage was that it wasn’t fair that gay couples didn’t have access to all of the married partner benefits offered by corporations to heterosexual married couples. As a result, many corporations offered those benefits to homosexuals who simply registered a domestic partnership. But now that Gay marriage is legal in 37 states, and set to go nationwide in June, companies are telling their homosexual employees that now they have to abide by the same rules their heterosexual employees do – get married or lose your benefits.
The “problem” with that is that as surveys have shown, while most homosexuals want both corporate benefits and gay marriage to be legalized, they don’t actually want to get married. As Homosexual advocate Dan Savage has argued, “monogamy is boring.” So, they are now arguing that having to get married to have married partner benefits is actually “discrimination” and many companies, terrified of being labeled as homophobic, will respond by dropping the marriage requirement entirely for both homosexual AND heterosexual couples, thus further undermining marriage and further incentivizing and norming temporary and non-monogamous relationships. Experts are agreed that unstable relationships are disastrous for children, and some sociologist are now arguing that as the majority of American children are born out of wedlock, the “elite” children of marriage have an unfair advantage. Given that American adults have indicated that when it comes to sex they want to be able to act like they’re freshmen in a party college for their entre lives, how soon before the government concludes that they should be the primary guardians of children to shield them both from the negative consequences of their parent’s behavior AND prevent some children from having those “unfair advantages”?
Holland has had gay marriage for over a decade, yet only 20% of gay couples there have chosen to marry (as compared to 80% of heterosexual Dutchmen) similar stats can be found in Massachusetts. There tends to be an initial “novelty” surge and then the same-sex marriage rate declines. There is also a huge disproportion between the number of Lesbian and Gay Male marriages. Lesbians are simply far more likely to marry…. I’m struggling to remember the Pew figures but I remember reading in 2013 that 3/5ths of all gay marriages reported nationwide were female-female. It’s possible that will change, but unlikely especially given millennials growing lack of interest overall and the decline in both stigma for remaining unmarried and the decline in social benefits for doing so.
And if you think that is scary, the non-discrimination push (I perceive society’s move towards same-sex marriage as having arisen from a new and illogical drive for non-discrimination) gets worse. Check this article out –