Why Conservatives Should Insist on Same-Sex Marriage
There is a conservative argument for same-sex marriage, and it might be convincing some religious voters and that ever-elusive movable middle on the issue of marriage equality. The latest person to champion it? E.J. Dionne, the Catholic Washington Post columnist who used to be against gay marriage, but found himself convinced by conservative talking points on the issue.
Just what is the conservative argument for same-sex marriage? It's been around for a while. Some might say Andrew Sullivan planted the first seeds back in 1989, before marriage equality was even a blip on the radar screen. Sullivan argued that marriage would "envelop" gays and lesbians in "family life," a structure generally revered by conservatives as a bedrock of society. He also argued that by denying gays and lesbians the chance to enter into marriage, conservatives threatened to cheapen the definition and integrity of the word. If marriage is an institution that makes people better individuals and fosters stronger relationships -- something that conservatives believe -- then why wouldn't it make sense to allow gays and lesbians to marry?
Conservative New York Times columnist David Brooks took that argument and ran wild with it a few years back, saying that marriage breeds fidelity. Shouldn't we want all people, both gay and straight, to be faithful, Brooks asked. But he took it much further than that.
"[Conservatives] shouldn't just allow gay marriage. We should insist on gay marriage. We should regard it as scandalous that two people could claim to love each other and not want to sanctify their love with marriage and fidelity," Brooks wrote.
And now E.J. Dionne is taking that argument and running with it. Sullivan, Brooks and Dionne -- a hat trick of columnists buying into a conservative case for gay marriage.
According to Providence Journal columnist Edward Fitzpatrick, Dionne has bought into the ideals of the conservative case for same-sex marriage. Fitzpatrick notes that in Dionne's 2008 book Souled Out: Reclaiming Faith & Politics After the Religious Right, Dionne argued that gay marriage was beneficial to society, and that all of us -- gay and straight -- should deserve the chance to enter into relationships that might lead to the comfort and support that marriage can provide.
Do these arguments carry water? Often times the issue of marriage equality is framed as a civil rights issue, and It most certainly is. But after 31 defeats at the ballot box for gay marriage, is it maybe time to take a look at what pro-gay Republicans are saying about marriage equality, and see if their messaging works well with voters?
David Brooks ended his argument for the conservative case for same-sex marriage with a suggestion that gay marriage proponents reframe the issue.
"When liberals argue for gay marriage, they make it sound like a really good employee benefits plan. Or they frame it as a civil rights issue, like extending the right to vote," Brooks wrote. "It's going to be up to conservatives to make the important, moral case for marriage, including gay marriage. Not making it means drifting further into the culture of contingency, which, when it comes to intimate and sacred relations, is an abomination."
The truth, of course, likely lies somewhere in between the conservative case for gay marriage and the liberal case for gay marriage. But both sides clearly have their merits.
Michael Jones
is a Change.org Editor. He has worked in the field of human rights communications for a decade, most recently for Harvard Law School.
COMMENTS (50)