All right, you say, so cohabitation is a poor substitute for marriage
and may even undermine those marriages preceded by cohabitation. But
how does allowing persons of the same sex to marry harm the institution
of marriage? As advocates of same-sex marriage (SSM) are quick to point
out, “the sky hasn’t fallen” since SSM became legal in Massachusetts in
2004, apparently convinced that four short years is adequate to produce
the predictable and deleterious public consequence of redefining
marriage. Remember, however, that Unwin’s research demonstrated that
the effects of such modification would occur over generations and not
be immediate. Nonetheless, there is some empirical evidence already
emerging that indicates the acceptance of SSM will, in fact, harm the
institution of marriage and, subsequently, society.
Stanley
Kurtz, senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institute,
reported in April of 2004 before the House Judiciary Committee that
there is ample evidence available in Scandinavia demonstrating the
effect of devolving marriage to include couples of the same sex. Dr.
Kurtz holds a PhD in social anthropology from Harvard University and is
regarded as both an excellent scholar and expert in this area.
Commenting on the situation in Sweden, Kurtz writes:
The Swedes have simply drawn the final
conclusion: If we’ve come so far without marriage, why marry at all?
Our love is what matters, not a piece of paper. Why should children
change that? (Stanley Kurtz, “The End of Marriage in Scandinavia: The
‘conservative case’ for same-sex marriage collapses,” The Weekly Standard, 2 February 2004.)
Indeed, in Sweden the out-of-wedlock birthrate is 55 percent,
Norway is 50 percent, Iceland is approaching 70 percent, and in Denmark
60 percent of firstborn children are born out of wedlock. So what? you
ask. So cohabitation has replaced marriage, big deal; men and women are
still having children, only without the formality of a marriage
certificate. What’s the problem? According to Dr. Kurtz, studies in
these countries demonstrate that these
unmarried families break up at a rate two to three times that of married couples.
This has only exacerbated the welfare state that is unparalleled in
Scandinavia. Kurtz points out that “no western nation has a higher
percentage of public employees, public expenditures, or higher tax
rates than Sweden.”
And what does this have to do with SSM? All of the Scandinavian countries mentioned embraced
de facto
same-sex marriage, beginning with Denmark in 1989. The out-of-wedlock
birth rates mentioned experienced their most dramatic increases in the
decade
following the
acceptance of SSM in these countries. The separation of marriage from
procreation and parenting was already increasing, as it is here; SSM
only widened the separation. “In Scandinavia, gay marriage has driven
home the message that marriage itself is outdated, and that virtually
any family form, including out-of-wedlock parenthood is acceptable”
(Kurtz, “The End of Marriage”).
Dr. Kurtz offers further
insight into the connection between cohabitation, rising out-of-wedlock
birthrates, and same-sex marriage:
British demographer Kathleen Kiernan .
. . divides the continent into three zones. The Nordic countries are
the leaders in cohabitation and out-of-wedlock births. They are
followed by a middle group that includes the Netherlands, Belgium,
Great Britain, and Germany . . . North American rates of cohabitation
and out-of-wedlock birth put the United States and Canada into this
middle group. Most resistant to cohabitation, family dissolution, and
out-of-wedlock births are the southern European countries of Portugal,
Italy, and Greece . . . These three groupings closely track the
movement for gay marriage. In the late eighties and early nineties, gay
marriage came to the Nordic countries, where the out-of-wedlock
birthrate was already high. Ten years later, out-of-wedlock birthrates
have risen significantly in the middle group of nations. Not
coincidentally, nearly every country in that middle group has recently
either legalized some form of gay marriage, or is seriously considering
doing so. Only in the group with low out-of-wedlock birthrates has the
gay marriage movement achieved relatively little success.