The Institution Formerly Known as Marriage

download The Institution Formerly Known as Marriage

of 2

Transcript of The Institution Formerly Known as Marriage

  • 8/9/2019 The Institution Formerly Known as Marriage

    1/2

    Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse 663 S. Rancho Santa Fe Road Suite 222 San Marcos CA 92078www.jennifer-roback-morse.com email: [email protected] 760/295-92782007 No part of this document may be reproduced or disseminated in any way without the expressed written consent of theRuth Institute.

    The InstitutionFormerly Knownas MarriageBy Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

    The essential public purpose of marriage isto attach mothers and fathers to their children and to one another. Judge VaughnWalker's ruling overturning California'sProposition 8 illustrates that he does notunderstand this basic point.

    He replaces this public purpose with private purposes of adults' feelings and desires. Heapprovingly quotes a historian who explainsthat marriage is "a couple's choice to live

    with each other, to remain committed to oneanother, and to form a household based ontheir own feelings about one another, andtheir agreement to join in an economic

    partnership and support one another in termsof the material needs of life."

    Nothing about children. No understandingthat marriage connects generations. By thetime Judge Walker and his ilk are finished,there will be nothing left of marriage but a

    government registry of friendships.

    There are two big problems with this. First,"marriage" will no longer solve the essential

    problem of attaching children to their mothers and fathers. Instead of using

    biology or legal adoption as the determining

    factor in deciding who counts as a parent,the courts are inventing a new kind of

    parenthood to resolve these disputes.

    "De Facto Parent" is the legal invention thatusually involves court-created "tests" todecide whether a person has wiped enoughnoses and changed enough diapers to countas a "parent in fact." The natural meaning of "mother" and "father" as biologicalcategories are being replaced by a new kindof parenthood that expands the authority anddiscretion of the family courts.

    This redefinition of parenthood is a natural by-product of the redefinition of marriage.Judge Walker's decision Wednesday toredefine marriage is a catalyst for thisredefinition of parenthood.

    But the second big problem with turningmarriage into a government registry of friendships is just this: It makes the legalrecognition seem unnecessary. And that willlead some people to say, who needsmarriage at all? Let's just get rid of marriage, or get the state out of marriage, or tear down all the social, legal andinstitutional structures around marriage.

    That's not so bad for people who have nointention of having children and who getmarried as a status symbol. But it is not sogreat for people who do have children. Andit's not so great for children themselves.Children have a legitimate interest inknowing their own parents and their

    biological origins. Every mother needs to

  • 8/9/2019 The Institution Formerly Known as Marriage

    2/2

    Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse 663 S. Rancho Santa Fe Road Suite 222 San Marcos CA 92078www.jennifer-roback-morse.com email: [email protected] 760/295-92782007 No part of this document may be reproduced or disseminated in any way without the expressed written consent of theRuth Institute.

    know who counts as the father of her children and who has legal responsibility for her children.

    It is no good to say that parenthood iswhatever the adults say it is, and thegovernment can remain "neutral." The firsttime a group of adults disputes about what

    their parenting "contract" means, thegovernment will be involved, using criteriaof its own.

    Once again, redefining marriage increasesthe authority and discretion of the familycourts. The natural concept of mother andfather as biological realities will beundermined.

    Surely the voters have the right to beconsulted before making such a major change in public policy. This is just one of the many ways that redefining marriage to

    be the union of any two persons will affecteveryone.

    Judge Walker has no right to disparage thevoters of California the way he does in thisopinion. Let the democratic process playitself out. We have plenty to talk about,without judges telling us we are all bigotsunless we agree with them.

    Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D. is aneconomist and the Founder and President of the Ruth Institute , a nonprofit educational organization devoted to bringing hope and encouragement for lifelong married love .She is also the author of Love and

    Economics: It Takes a Family to Raise aVillage and Smart Sex: Finding Life-Long

    Love in a Hook-Up World.

    http://www.ruthinstitute.org/pages/DrJBio.htmlhttp://www.ruthinstitute.org/index.htmlhttp://www.ruthinstitute.org/index.htmlhttp://www.myruth.org/site/apps/ka/ec/category.asp?c=gpILKXOAJqG&b=5539911&en=imLUIaMQIiJ0IaNQIfL0LpNaIqLVIgNZJdITL8MWLjJ2JvKhttp://www.myruth.org/site/apps/ka/ec/category.asp?c=gpILKXOAJqG&b=5539911&en=imLUIaMQIiJ0IaNQIfL0LpNaIqLVIgNZJdITL8MWLjJ2JvKhttp://www.myruth.org/site/apps/ka/ec/category.asp?c=gpILKXOAJqG&b=5539911&en=imLUIaMQIiJ0IaNQIfL0LpNaIqLVIgNZJdITL8MWLjJ2JvKhttp://www.myruth.org/site/apps/ka/ec/category.asp?c=gpILKXOAJqG&b=5539911&en=imLUIaMQIiJ0IaNQIfL0LpNaIqLVIgNZJdITL8MWLjJ2JvKhttp://www.myruth.org/site/apps/ka/ec/category.asp?c=gpILKXOAJqG&b=5539911&en=imLUIaMQIiJ0IaNQIfL0LpNaIqLVIgNZJdITL8MWLjJ2JvKhttp://www.myruth.org/site/apps/ka/ec/category.asp?c=gpILKXOAJqG&b=5539911&en=imLUIaMQIiJ0IaNQIfL0LpNaIqLVIgNZJdITL8MWLjJ2JvKhttp://www.myruth.org/site/apps/ka/ec/category.asp?c=gpILKXOAJqG&b=5539911&en=imLUIaMQIiJ0IaNQIfL0LpNaIqLVIgNZJdITL8MWLjJ2JvKhttp://www.myruth.org/site/apps/ka/ec/category.asp?c=gpILKXOAJqG&b=5539911&en=imLUIaMQIiJ0IaNQIfL0LpNaIqLVIgNZJdITL8MWLjJ2JvKhttp://www.ruthinstitute.org/index.htmlhttp://www.ruthinstitute.org/pages/DrJBio.html