Today the Supreme Court is hearing arguments about “whether same-sex couples enjoy a constitutional right to marry.”
There are many specious arguments being used in an attempt to convince the justices that gays and lesbians should be denied the rights accorded by the state for their unions — or marriages as we commonly refer to them.
The most specious of these arguments is the old Procreation Rationale — that marriage is meant for procreation. The Procreation Rationale relative to “marriage” when it comes to the state is ridiculous, though, for a number of reasons. For instance, for most of human history the protection of procreation was paramount to the survival of the species. That is, if we did not reproduce, the species would die out. From an evolutionary point of view, it made sense that humans would create a sacrosanct unbreakable institution to promote procreation — this is what we call marriage. But with 7 billion humans on the planet, this ancient need for procreation is not necessary anymore. And neither is the ancient definition of marriage being about procreation between a man and a woman necessary.
The Procreation Rationale is specious, though, mostly because the state — being a utilitarian entity — does not, nor should it, care why people get married, except inasmuch as it is a legal contract between two consenting adults.
Indeed, the whole concept of the state recognizing marriages completely annihilates any romantic, sexual, biological, or theological understanding of this human relationship. The State is robotic, mechanistic, and most importantly, utilitarian — The State does not even care of you love each other. Marriage to the state is simply a legal agreement between two consenting adults which grants exclusive rights and privileges offered by the state to that couple. The state has an interest in this coupling which is why it offers these exclusive benefits. It stands to reason that if the state benefits from heterosexuals marrying, then it benefits from gays and lesbians marrying.
For people who want something more — endorsement that the marriage is sanctioned by God, for instance — he or she must go beyond the state, to the church, which stands separate from the state. A couple can do both, for sure, but only needs to be recognized by the state to take advantage of the benefits of state sanctioned marriage; and that should not be denied to our gay and lesbian neighbors by the state. Nor does granting them what is legally and constitutionally due to them have any affect on anyone else’s marriage.