Same-Sex Marriage - Part 4
This is the fourth post in a series summarizing the responses of Greg Koukl to the common objections raised by same-sex couples to opposition to the revision of the institution of marriage. Koukl’s entire article can be found at Townhall.com. The fourth objection raised has to do with the very nature of what marriage is:
As long as people love each other, it shouldn’t matter whether they are the same sex. What’s important in marriage is love.
Is marriage really about love? At face value, this seems to be a reasonable way of reflecting on marriage. However, upon further reflection, it’s clear that love and marriage are not always associated. In fact, the two are often not associated. Throughout history (and even today) many marriages have been arranged. Love may be a part of the relationship later in this case, as a result of marriage, and not as a reason for it.
Further, what is the purpose of the marriage vows? Why say “for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health?” As Koukl points out, vows are meant to sustain the union when love wanes. They keep the marriage intact, not for the sake of love, but for the sake of children. Marriage is not about love. The state requires no proof of love when granting licenses for marriage. Why? Love is not the reason for marriage. Now, hopefully it is found in marriages, but no proof of passion is required to gain a marriage license. Marriage is about something other than love.
Next, another response.