On the gay marriage debates

Something I have noticed on the Gay Marriage debates is what causes people to change their minds, and it is generally social proof.

• Those most likely to change from opposed to in favor of gay marriage know gays in long term, monogamous, committed relationships.
• Those most likely to change from in favor to opposed meet gays seeking benefits who are either not in exclusive relationships or who are hostile to a religious or heterosexual group.

From studying conflict resolution, I find myself often just as interested in how the process of conversion works as any other part of a conflict.

But I started reflecting on what marriage was and what it has become.

At one time, sterility was a basis for annulment. marriage was a child rearing procreative driven economic partnership. In some cultures love was considered inappropriate, in others, impossible vis a vis marriage. Marriage was something far different.

But what is it now? As far as I can tell, there are two competing models.

• There is the "forsaking all others" model, marriage as a celebration of pair bonding. Monogamous marriage.
• There is the "marriage is a pathway to entitlements" model, marriage as a title that conveys a benefit. Often seen in "open" or social marriages (such as green card marriages where the parties have no contact and nothing in common).

I'm not going to argue what marriage should be, only state that I think that, perhaps, gay marriage may be the wrong frame for the debate as to what marriage is and should be.

See my longer post on the same topic, simulposted at Mormon Matters.