For centuries, marriage has been the basis for not only a strong family but also a strong society. This is all by way of saying that the definition of marriage itself has not changed much for many thousands of years, all over the world. Men and women live together, as a couple, produce children, and raise themâ€”creating within society another society in miniature. In fact, we can define the family in this way: a small society within society. However, â€œsame-sexâ€ marriage threatens to subvert not only the establishment of marriage but very the foundation of civilization.
Is same-sex marriage really marriage? Marriage, heterosexual coupling, ultimately produces offspring, which furthers the survival of the species, and sets the social framework for moral and civil responsibility. Heterosexual marriage is not merely a social construct: it is, rather, a necessary biological act that is expressed socially. In modern societies, marriage and ultimately family have their own unique responsibilities as well as rewards. Children, until they reach adulthood, and wives, whether they are widowed or divorced, enjoy certain financial, social, and legal rights that are unavailable to single adults. It is not that being single is bad and being married is good in any kind of moral sense; instead, marriage is necessary for the survival of civilization. For example, women in particular have the right of alimony, palimony; they are more likely to be given child custody in a divorce; women in most modern societies also enjoy paternal leave, with pay. Most people see these rights as progressive: the very hallmarks of a civilized society. Why? Society, like any other organism, seeks its own survival, and recognizes that its survival is contingent upon heterosexual marriage. Everything else is marginal. In the case of female spouses who are widowed or divorced, deference is shown toward women because of their role as societyâ€™s