Marriage. Just a label?

The 9th circuit seems to think so. They overturned the public on proposition 8 because of the rationale that the term ‘marriage’ had no substance. It was all about whether gay couples could call themselves ‘married.’ The people via due process said they could not use the term. The courts, so far, are saying otherwise.

No wonder family researchers and historians are concerned. At this point in American history, the confusion, ambivalence and controversy over marriage are at a tipping point where the outcome is uncertain and the stakes are enormous. The reams of research data and the common experiences of teachers, social workers and law enforcement officers who see the outcomes of family breakdown on a day-to-day basis need to break through the media fog to reach the minds of the public to change attitudes and convince young people that marriage matters for each of them and that it matters for all of us.

Janice Shaw Crouse says ‘I do’ does matter and explains why. That rationale needs to be compared to that of the court for a proper perspective of the issue.

Comments are closed.