Dracil’s BlogJournal

May 15, 2008

Protect Marriage?

As you’ve probably heard by now, the California Supreme Court ruled today that gay marriage is legal.

Naturally, there are groups whining about it and attempting to put an amendment on the November ballots.

Of course, we all know they’re hypocrites.  Even assuming gay marriage really is some great evil that hurts “traditional marriage”, let’s be realistic.  The LGBT community is just slightly more than 1% of the Californian population.  It’s insignificant.

If these people truly cared about protecting the institution of marriage, they should be going after adultery and divorce.  The percentage of Californians who are married is 48.5%.  About 1/3 to 1/2 of those marriages will end in divorce.  From various figures I’ve seen, the adultery rate is about 50%.  There are some lower bounds on adultery rates based on paternity tests done, but they also vary, hence the 5-30% figure that I mentioned in my review of Wedding Crashers.  The book I got it from mentioned a specific study showed a 10% non-paternity rate in the 1940s.  There’s another study mentioned at the Canadian Children’s Rights Council from the 70s, where 30% of the students in a class discovered their dad was not their biological father, so 50% is probably a fair number to use for adultery rates (as not all adultery leads to children)

Since adultery also often leads to divorce, some of these numbers will overlap, but I think it’s a good estimate that at least 25% of the population will be in adulterous and/or divorced marriages.  That’s over 20 times greater than any possible “threat” that could be caused by allowing the LGBT community to marry each other.

Shouldn’t these “protect marriage” people be going after all these heterosexual people instead?  Much more bang for their buck after all.

Advertisements

2 Comments »

  1. Yeah, but if they acknowledged that there were problems with marriages like divorce and adultery, that might cast doubt on the superiority of heterosexual marriage as an institution. That’s why they really need gay marriage to attack – if they didn’t have the LGBT community to scapegoat, how would they explain the problems staring them in the face?

    Comment by Winawer — May 15, 2008 @ 9:23 pm

  2. What you’re proposing is too logical, though.

    Their motivation doesn’t stem from logic or morals but from hatred and fear.

    Comment by ubuntucat — May 18, 2008 @ 11:00 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: