Good Reading
Essays (37)


       A Declaration On Marriage

 
 
Article 1                                   Marriage And The Family Are Universal

All human beings are born of a mother and begotten by a father. This is a universal biological reality and the common experience of all people. The state supports the institution of marriage because it promotes and protects the father-mother-child relationship as the only natural means of creating and continuing human life and society. 

 

Article 2                               Marriage Means One Man And One Woman

Marriage in Canada has always been defined as “the union of one man and one woman,” the chief function of which is to promote the biological unity of sexual opposites as the basis for family formation. Governments may want to support other relationships, but these should not be called “marriage,” or confused with it.

 
Article 3                                        Marriage Is Centred On Children
Marriage is a child-centred, not an adult-centred, institution. No one has the right to redefine marriage so as to intentionally impose a fatherless or motherless home on a child as a matter of state policy.
 
Article 4                                           Marriage Rests On Four Conditions

Marriage is a solid social structure resting on four conditions concerning number, gender, age, and incest. We are permitted to marry only one person at a time. They must be someone of the opposite sex. They must not be below a certain age. They must not be a close blood relative. Those who satisfy all these conditions - each of which safeguards the well-being of children, the family, and society - have a right to marry. The removal of any of them threatens the stability of the whole structure.

 
Article5                                                Marriage Is About More Than Equality

All government policies are intentionally preferential. If we want welfare or veterans’ benefits, or child-support, or marital benefits, we have to qualify for them. Such policies are ordinary forms of distributive justice through which, for its own good, the state discriminates in favour of some people, and some relationships, and not others. So an absence of  “equality” is not a good argument against such policies. As same-sex partnerships already receive the same benefits as marriages, however, something else is at issue: an attempt to persuade the public that such partnerships are of the same value to society as marriages. But they can only be made so by denying the unique contribution of marriage as a biologically-unitive, child-centred institution.

 
Article 6                                        Marriage Is About  More Than Love

The fact that two people say they love each other does not, in itself, justify a right to the benefits conferred by the state on married couples. The only justification for a state interest in the privacy of love flows from the connection between the political fact that the state has a fundamental concern for its own survival and well-being, the biological fact that all human beings require someone of the opposite sex to create life,  and the social fact that children have a natural claim to the love and support of their own mothers and fathers.Accordingly, the only kind of private love that is of justifiable public concern is the love that occurs between two people who qualify for marriage by complying with the four conditions in Article 4.

 
Article 7                                       Marriage Belongs To The People

Marriage is an institution that has arisen from long-held beliefs and customs of the people that are prior to all states and all courts, and are essential to the very fabric of society. Any attempt by unelected officials of the courts or by any other branch of government to claim ownership of marriage, to alter it without the support of a significant majority of the people, or to diminish the father-mother-child relationship in favour of the state-citizen relation, usurps the natural rights and freedoms of the people and constitutes a serious breach of the public trust.

 

Bookmark and Share