Only in America has marriage become a dirty word. We have criminalized it between people of different races, genders, ages, mental states, religions and sexual orientations. We have doled out billions of dollars in benefits for couples and much more to decide what happens when it doesn’t work out. We have struggled with its legitimacy as it has transformed from a religious to a legal institution. But despite all efforts to push and pull people away from each other, marriage remains a social construct. For better or worse, in sickness and in health, we are bound by it. But who sets the rules?
In many states, marriage has retained its religious connotation, as legislators have elected to use the Bible to determine who is allowed to marry. But the word of God is increasingly being replaced by democracy, and in some areas the people have spoken loud and clear in favor of allowing same-sex couples to make their vows. This no doubt represents a great victory for gay and lesbian rights, but why stop here and now? There is much more freedom to be won, but only if we are willing to win it.
Marriage has traditionally been defined in the collective sense. Definitions vary state by state, nation by nation. Yet this ignores the indisputable fact that at its core, marriage is an inherently personal decision. It is a freedom any individual must voluntarily choose to exercise, and like all great liberties, the responsibility it entails is immense. Therefore, why is it acceptable for a group of people to decide for another group of people whom they can marry? Regardless of all the positive utilitarian effects of marriage, how can one justify forcing an individual to adhere to a certain definition of the term? This is the society we have, in which everybody decides who people are allowed to marry. Individuality is lost in a maze of laws and regulations, definitions and distinctions, social pressures and dogmatic conventions.
By letting people decide for themselves what constitutes marriage, the door is potentially opened for those seeking the right to marry multiple people, dead persons, ideas, inanimate objects, animals and virtually anything else. If this is appalling and offensive, know that granting more rights to more people does nothing to erode those you already possess. The ridiculousness of my marriage does not diminish the sanctity of your own, and frankly, there is nothing more serious than individuals determining with whom or what to spend the rest of their lives. Letting emotions and popular sentiment dictate social policy has yielded powerful arguments for outlawing gay sex. They continue to be used for denying marriage to homosexual couples, and have rightfully been met with ridicule and disgust both inside and outside the courthouse.
While most people would agree that the Bible is no longer an authority on the issue, the prevalence of this view creates a vacuum of justification. Such a hole has been filled by the voting citizenry who bravely detached the religious sanctification of holy matrimony from the social construct it has become. But one aspect holds constant. It has remained a choice, a decision one must make for whatever justification he or she sees fit. If there is any equality in marriage, it should be that every individual has the right to choose what it means to him or her. If marriage is love, if it is happiness, if it is companionship, commitment, devotion, passion, faith, trust or respect. If it is pure and unadulterated ecstasy laced with the frustration, toil, pain, forgiveness of a lifetime. If marriage is anything, it is a choice. So let it be chosen.