Why do we support marriage as a union of one man and one woman?


It’s not about romance. And it’s not about the desires of adults.

Speaking before lawmakers in Indiana yesterday, Ryan Anderson eloquently stated why the state has an interest in marriage that goes beyond our feelings and emotions:

“Whenever a child is born, a mother will always be close by. That’s a fact of biology. The question for culture and the question for law is: Will a father be close by? And if so, for how long? Marriage is the institution that different cultures and societies across time and place developed to maximize the likelihood that that man commits to that woman, and that the two of them take responsibility to raise that child….” 

“The state’s interest in marriage is not that it cares about my love life, or your love life, or anyone’s love life just for the sake of romance. The state’s interest in marriage is ensuring that those kids have fathers who are involved in their lives.

Well stated.

Actually, I encourage you all to watch Ryan Anderson’s testimony to the Indiana House Judiciary. Take 11 minutes to brush up on the best and most sound defenses of why the state should define marriage as a man and a woman.




57 thoughts on “Why do we support marriage as a union of one man and one woman?

  1. Stuey says:

    What about people who can’t have kids or choose not to have them? Should they be married? If it’s all about kids, then I guess we should re-think whether it’s really about a committed relationship for the sole purpose of children’s benefit.

    1. Cassy says:

      From the dawn of civilization society has promoted marriage because sex between a man & woman can be expected to result in pregnancy. With a committed dad, mom & baby are more likely to survive & kids grow into productive citizens. Marriage benefits the village.

      Barrenness isn’t new; also female fertility is biologically temporary. Government has no legitimate interest in the exact fertility of each & every marriage, too intrusive. See China.

      Sex between two men or two women does not result in pregnancy. Society has no positive reason to promote such pairings by calling them marriages.

  2. Ted Seeber says:

    Heterosexual Monogamy- the most successful welfare program fighting childhood poverty ever invented.

  3. Mary says:

    Thankyou Ryan Anderson.!

  4. Jack Mason says:

    There’s a problem with Anderson’s statement. Marriage was not created in any society to get commitment from men. That’s a complete falacy. Check “history of marriage” on the net.

  5. MorganB says:

    It is always a Catholic issue. You can try to count the people who claim to be married, but are not. They are wards of a state who granted them a license. One can only imagine how many billions are living in Catholic defined sin.

  6. musicacre says:

    I heard a Jewish Rabbi once say at a talk at a family conference that there is no word in the Hebrew language for “parent”. There is “mother” and there is “father”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>



Receive our updates via email.