The difficult debate on gay marriage.
The issue of whether to fundamentally change the institution of marriage from the form it has taken for thousands of years into something new, that is, the gay marriage debate, is an overgrown swamp, with little clarity and less utility. Getting a footing is the first step through.
Some basic works on the gay marriage issue include a gay marriage legal pathfinder (*) and a bibliography. (†)
An organization for gay marriage is Freedom to Marry. (‡) The National Organization for Women is a supporter. (§) A conservative proponent is Andrew Sullivan. (**) The fight for gay marriage is largely being carried out in the courts, with some legislative lobbying as well.
Opposition to gay marriage is led by the Alliance for Marriage. (††) The goal is to prevent the judicial creation of gay marriage by means of a constitutional amendment known as “the Federal Marriage Amendment.” Because it would of course amend the federal Constitution, in my view the better name would simply be “the marriage amendment.” The amendment is:
Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.
(‡‡) The amendment would constitutionalize marriage, leaving any recognition of civil unions to the states. Stanley Kurtz has frequently voiced his support for the marriage amendment. Kurtz has argued that gay marriage would put society down a slippery slope where quasi-marital or full marital recognition would necessarily be given to polyamorous marriages. (§§) Polyamory is the sexual union of multiple partners regardless of gender. Another staunch supporter of the marriage amendment is Maggie Gallagher. (***)
Most public statements on the issue have cited morality, implying that the other’s opposition to the issue is either in support of sin or hateful and unjust discrimination. It would be more productive to focus on the pragmatic arguments. For example, is it a good idea? Would it benefit society?
One open forum that seems to be dedicated to promoting such a pragmatic discussion is Marriage Debate. (†††)