A defense of marriage

Our City Council is scheduled to vote next Wednesday on a proposal to allow domestic partners to register themselves.

I guess I have to oppose it – or at least part of it -- on my own idea of defense of marriage.

I have no problem with gays and lesbians obtaining the status of married people. Registration would seem to me to have zero value, but there was emotional and forceful testimony given to the Council from people who felt that they truly wanted some governmental way of declaring their commitment to each other.

Since Minnesota law does not allow for gays and lesbians to marry, this would at least provide them some way of making a public declaration of their relationship. If our state allowed for gay marriage, there would be no need for other registrations.

But this proposal allows not only same-sex couples to register, but different-sex couples to do so also.

Why? Since time immemorial, men and women have the option to marry each other. Allowing non-married straight couples to register in this way seems to diminish the legal status of marriage, not only for straights but for the gays and lesbians who are seeking it.

Marriage is marriage. Registration should be thought of as a very poor substitute which many are forcing themselves to seek and which seems to lose some of whatever value it might have when used by people to whom marriage is possible and if four city council members and the mayor see it as an appropriate step, that will be fine. But it should only be a substitute where necessary.

The City Council should amend this ordinance to limit it to same-sex registration. They might also wish to provide for a sunset for the time when same-sex marriage becomes legal.