Let me further expand on my thoughts about marriage equality and why that is actually good for the institution of marriage as opposed to destroying it.
In reading Gay Marriage by Jonathan Rauch, Mr. Rauch points outs some thoughts I have not considered despite my active interest in this subject.
He first talks about marriage in general and what it is. Marriage is more then a contract between two people. Marriage is a contract known by and promoted by a community. The community knows what the marriage contract entails. They know it entails a serious commitment between two people, a commitment that not only has its blessings and rewards, but also has its disappointments and burdens.
The blessings and rewards include having a partner who will be there for you always, someone you can always count on to be there when you've had a bad day, be there to share your joy at a success, or your grief at a loss, someone who will laugh at your corny jokes or sit through your endless debates (like my husband!), someone to share your hobbies or travel with, someone to raise a family with, with all the joy and heartaches that entails!
Burdens and disappointments can include sharing in financial losses, having strong disagreements over issues that affect each other, learning to live with each other's idiosyncrasies, dealing with possible infidelities, dealing with your spouse's illness or incapacity, dealing with difficult issues with your children and so forth.
The community has a vested interest for the sake of social stability to help couples who have made this highest form of commitment to succeed. Since "marriage" is a well understood contract, the community knows what the commitment entails and will encourage its success. And because marriage is a difficult, though rewarding, level of personal commitment, the community will honor such couples with a certain level of status, a sign of respect for two people making such a commitment.
Some have suggested if gay couples be allowed to marry, when will we start allowing other types of arrangements to be called "marriage", like multiple partner marriage (more then one partner, polygamy)? We could, but keeping marriage limited to a contract between two people ensures that each person is wholly dependent on the other, that there is no division of responsibility or affection among multiple partners which could result in either unfair burdens on one of the partners or greater joy and satisfaction for one of the partners over the others. Think of multiple siblings fighting over who will take care of Mom who is old and invalid. Or think of jealousies that will develop among the multiple partners.
Such an argument does not preclude two sisters from marrying each other or an uncle and niece. Well maybe the uncle and niece might have the close genetics issue that could result in birth defects if they conceive a child together.
Mr. Rauch then goes on to discuss why marriage substitutes like civil unions and domestic partnerships are not good for gays, not good for straights, society, or the institution of marriage.
It's one thing when society does not fully understand what a civil union or domestic partnership is and therefore cannot share in promoting or encouraging such a commitment. But more importantly, if these marriage substitutes exist, they compete with marriage as an alternative to marriage.
Many people assume these quasi marriage arrangements are for gay couples only. They may in theory be designed as such, but if they are designed in such a way to have less legal entanglements and obligations and are easier to go into and out of then traditional civil marriage, it will not be long before straight couples demand these arrangements as an alternative for them. Not all straight couples will clamor for these arrangements, but many will. When that happens, traditional civil marriage is watered down even more as a unique contractual relationship between two people. It therefore further threatens the stability of the institution of marriage.
Allowing committed gay couples to marry both strengthens society as a whole and the institution of marriage itself. It promotes greater community stability and couple maturity. Because it is such a serious commitment that society understands, it helps enforce the commitments made between two people, including gay couples. Society understands promoting and encouraging the marriage commitments helps maintain the health and vitality of society itself.
So gay marriage will not destroy marriage, it will further strengthen it.