Western Standard
email print

Re: Same Sex Marriage

Michael Coren and Karen Selick square off on same-sex marriage

Michael Coren and Karen Selick - March 12, 2004

From: Karen Selick < kselick@westernstandard.ca >
To: Michael Coren < mcoren@westernstandard.ca >
Re: Same Sex Marriage

Dear Michael,
Conservatives who are upset over same-sex marriage are missing the forest for the trees. The real question is: Why should the state have any role in defining domestic relationships at all?

The state exists to prevent individuals from violating each other's rights to life, liberty and property ? not to write contracts for people who don't bother to write their own.

In my view, any two (or more!) adults should be able to adopt whatever voluntary domestic arrangements they wish without eitherthe approval or condemnation of the state. If they're smart, they'll write up a contract regarding their property, debts and kids. If they don't, the courts will have to sort it out if they separate ? but that's nothing new.

If couples (or threesomes, etc.) belong to some voluntary, non-state organization ? for instance, a church ? and want its stamp ofapproval, the organization should set its own requirements for granting the "married" label and ensuring that applicants meet therequirements. Such organizations might even provide standard marriage contracts for members to use. But why involve the state?

From: Michael Coren < mcoren@westernstandard.ca >
To: Karen Selick < kselick@westernstandard.ca >
Re: Same Sex Marriage

Dear Karen,
I agree that the state should be kept at a suitable distance, and I was more comfortable when religious bodies alone registered marriage. That changed over the years, and I don't think we can turn it back. But there's a deeper issue here; namely, the definition of marriage. The very concept is seen as arbitrary by some people, but they're terribly wrong. It is faith-based in origin, andwe made a mistake when we allowed common law relationships to be described as marriages. Be that as it may, we now face the most profound change in the defining of a foundational element of society. It alters the very nature of what and who we are. Gay people can and do love each other, but to describe their partnership as a marriage is no more valid than suddenly claiming that my marriage to my wife is a poached egg! No compromise on love, but no compromise on truth. Issues of children's rights, natural law and sheer common sense all come into play here.

From: Karen Selick < kselick@westernstandard.ca >
To: Michael Coren < mcoren@westernstandard.ca >
Re: Same Sex Marriage

More articles by Michael Coren and Karen Selick