Proponents of gay marriage have managed to frame the issue as one of equal treatment under the law, often asking opponents to demonstrate how the marriage of two men or two women could cause harm to anyone’s heterosexual marriage.
This is an entirely wrong and misleading framework and question. The more relevant question ought to be why governments have an interest in sanctioning marriages at all.
The answer to that one is clear. Because of their concern for the general welfare, governments have a compelling interest in sanctioning behaviors designed to perpetuate order and progress. With that in mind, they have an interest in sanctioning the only kind of sexual relations best designed to lead to healthy children being raised in a way that gives them the greatest chance for success as adults. That is through the marriage of one man and one woman
But now Judge Vaughn Walker of the U.S. District Court in San Francisco has overturned voter-approved Proposition 8. Along the way, he managed to cast those in favor of Proposition 8 as irrational people who base their feelings on moral and religious views, which he sweeps aside as an immaterial basis for a law.
To the contrary, the benefits of heterosexual marriage are rational and time-tested. Governments have no interest in sanctioning or solemnizing the love people may have for one another. They do, however, have a great interest in sanctioning a time-tested institution that is best for children.