A QUESTION OF MARRIAGE.

Byline: Kim Grossnicklaus For The Register-Guard

Traditional marriage is uniquely diverse, in that it contains equality for both genders. "One man, one woman" gives both genders equal dignity, authority and responsibility while also providing the necessary role models for children.

Yet the universal structure of family, where children are conceived and raised by their own parents, is being tipped upside down. The adage "First comes love, then comes marriage, then comes baby in a baby carriage" seems to be lining up for a fall. No longer is sex in tune with reproduction and the parenting aspect of committed love. Moms and dads are now being redefined as interchangeable and/or unnecessary in the various roles they play in raising their kids.

When marital boundaries become blurred, the primary purpose of marriage - the creation, nurture and protection of children - is eroded. The question evolves from "What is marriage for?" to "Why even marry?"

But marriage is not the real problem - the real problem is us. We have replaced "till death do us part" with "however long it feels good." The introduction of "no-fault" divorce in the early 1970s and the increasing acceptance of premarital cohabitation and casual sex have all resulted in an increase in single parenting. The institution of marriage has been suffering blows for decades, and gay marriage would be another.

Clearly, broken homes are a poor substitute for a lasting marriage. Add to this the proposed removal of husband and wife - dad and mom - in the marriage equation and you have removed a crucial element of successful childrearing.

This can be illustrated by the experience in Scandinavian countries that have led the way in rejecting traditional marriage. According to the National Report on Youth Policy in Norway 2003-04, by professor Halvor Fauske of the University of Lillehammer, "Attitudes to unmarried partnerships have changed radically in the past 20 years. ... The idea of a lasting committed relationship appears to be difficult for many."

Denmark, for example, which was the first country to legitimize gay marriage, now has an astounding 60 percent of children born to unwed parents. The Economic Commission for Europe 2000 stated that "The problem with the lack of marriage is that unmarried partners split up two or three times more frequently than married couples," causing fractured homes and fractured children. Yet it is the lasting commitment of a lifelong relationship that is the very foundation of traditional marriage, and what gives it its most intrinsic value.

Children require security and boundaries. Shattered or transient homes do not provide those things.

Gay marriage proponents point to the failure of heterosexual unions, and to some extent their point is valid - yet homosexual marriage, where it is legal, has fared much worse. A British medical journal titled AIDS reported in 2003 that the average "committed" homosexual relationship among males lasts 18 months, and that gay men average eight additional partners outside of their primary relationship (`The Contribution of Steady and Casual Partners to the Incidence of HIV').

Gunnar Andersson, in "Divorce Risk Patterns in Same Sex Marriages in Norway and Sweden," reports that between 1998 and 2000, male couples were 50 percent more likely to divorce in an eight-year period than heterosexuals; for lesbians the statistic rose to 167 percent.

Maggie Gallagher of the Institute of Marriage and Public Policy contends, "If homosexuals are allowed to marry, marriage will become a meaningless word applied to relationships of any length, gender or number."

In Utah, cases are currently on file to establish legal authority for polygamy. Their justification is being based on the U.S. Supreme Court's Lawrence vs. Texas decision, which legalized sodomy. The ACLU in Utah has asserted "the nuclear family may not be necessarily the best model ... the state will have to step up to prove that a polygamist relationship is detrimental to society." A further complication of this argument is how to accommodate the desire for marriage among bisexuals.

Contrary to some current beliefs, marriage is about parenting. With the erosion of marriage comes the erosion of parental authority. As seen in all communities where kids lack parental authority or paternal role models, a whole host of emotional problems and social ills are the result. Two women, no matter how loving, can never be a father.

A further troubling trend in countries where the gay lifestyle has become legitimized is the deterioration of protective boundaries for sexual consent. In Holland, the legal age for consensual sex is 12, due to the efforts of the Dutch Paedophile Emancipation Movement, which was strongly lobbied for by the Dutch Association for the Integration of Homosexuality. A parent in Holland cannot legally stop a sexual relationship between an adult and a 12-year-old unless they can persuade the Council for the Protection of Children that the act was not consensual (see "The Emancipated Child" by William Norman Gregg).

A pamphlet put out by the DAIM concludes, "Nobody is allowed to interfere within adult-child homosexual contacts as long as the situation is mutually agreeable." England's well-known homosexual group Outrage is launching its own campaign to reduce the age of consent to 14.

When talking about discrimination in marriage laws, it is important to remember that all laws involve making a discriminating decision on what is best for society. A landowner cannot create an environmental hazard on his or her property, a person cannot vote until the age of 18, or if they are in prison; and 12-year-olds are not allowed to drive.

Similarly, laws defining marriage discriminate on behalf of what's best for children. While proponents of same-sex marriage often claim that it is necessary to secure insurance and inheritance rights for children, the fact is that many same-sex couples are already covered by group health plans. Important inheritance and medical decisions can easily be accomplished by the same methods employed by heterosexual couples.

Since our nation was founded, marriage has served as the bedrock of our society. An 1885 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Murphy vs. Ramsey, speaks to the value of traditional marriage: "Certainly no legislation can be supposed more wholesome and necessary for the founding of a free self-governing commonwealth, than that which seeks to establish it on the basis of the idea of the family, as consisting in, and springing from, the union of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization. The best guarantee of that reverent morality which is the source of all the beneficent progress in social and political improvement."

Clearly in the full analysis, marriage in America is in need of "home improvement." But that does not mean we should abandon the institution or redefine marriage as come one, come all. Despite regrettable failures, children do best when raised by their own parents in a strong traditional marriage.

We as a society should recommit to the idea of marriage as it functions best - as a lifelong commitment for the benefit of America's children and generations to come.

Kim Grossnicklaus of Eugene is the mother of four children, one of whom is adopted, and has worked in the field of early childhood education.