A caller to the Stand To Reason radio program Sunday, who ran out of time before he got on the air, asked a very good question. Since Prop. 8 sought to clarify the definition of marriage and the judge struck it down, did he replace it with a new definition? What is the definition of marriage now in California? Is there one?
While the ruling declared that the definition California has used since the beginning of statehood was unconstitutional, did it put a new definition in place? A definition is merely a description or limitation of what a marriage is. Is there any limitation, albeit a newly expanded?
Certainly, the judge’s ruling made definition of marriage a moving target, open to cultural redefinition according to evolving social norms. He struck down the definition in the law because we have new social sensitivities that dictate more inclusion. That means the definition of marriage changes as society changes. Even if we do have a new definition of marriage the very same judge could rule that definition unconstitutional in ten years if our social standards have changed.
In other words, marriage is anything we say it is. After all, who’s to say? Who’s to impose their limitations on anyone else who wants to claim a right to marriage? No one, that’s who. That’s the practical result of the ruling.
That’s very true. There’s no reason a group of three people cannot request a marriage license in California now or a boy and his mother or a brother and sister. If the traditional definition is off the table, then its open season basically.
First, I think the Judge was wrong. I don’t think he had any constitutional grounds to declare the amendment unconstitutional. Second, I think Homosexuality is wrong. It is bad for people, it is bad for society.
However, I do think the meaning of words do change over time. This happens all the time. The definition of marriage has changed in the last 30 years because of divorce, access to birth control and abortion. I don’t think any law, even an amendment to the constitution can stop the meaning of words from changing.
O’Ryan, I’m a little confused. How do you think the definition of marriage has changed due to divorce, birth control, and abortion?
I am asserting, and I think it is true, that words are defined by their essential properties through their use by a society. Words are not defined by documents such as dictionaries, laws, or even the constitution.
So, how the definition of marriage has changed in the last 30 or so years is it has gone from meaning a permanent relationship of responsibility to another person to a relationship of personal happiness and fulfillment. I think this is because children are not a necessary part of the relationship, and it is easy to abandon the relationship when one party disappointed in any way through “no fault divorce”.
Another thing that struck me in thinking about this is that God redefined the meaning of marriage. In the garden he intended for the “two to become one” I think in more ways than just coupling. The idea having roots in the Trinity; perhaps a discussion for a different time. When the law was instituted by Moses; God gave the institution of divorce because society had changed, i.e. “Because of their hardheartedness.”
Similarly, it changed throughout the story line of the bible. From the Garden, to Lemech taking 2 wives to the polygamy of the Fathers of Israel, to the gross polygamy of David and Solomon etc.