Tina Beattie :

I have never been able to understand the argument that same-sex marriage threatens marriage as we know it. Marriage is far more threatened by a consumerist culture in which the demand for instant gratification is worth the sacrifice of any relationship or responsibility which involves commitment and struggle, and by an ethos of sexual libertarianism which so easily mutates into predatory and exploitative relationships involving young and vulnerable people, and which fosters unrealistically high expectations of sexual performance among adults who ought to know better.

In this context, society stands to benefit from any move towards a deeper understanding of the value of “lifelong fidelity and commitment” between two people, whether of the same sex or of different sexes, as a basic building block for community and family life. And let’s be honest – the gay subculture is such that there may be relatively few men in particular who want to agree to “forsake all others” and opt for lifelong monogamy, which is implicit in the understanding of marriage informing the current debate.

When evangelical preacher Steve Chalke recently argued in favour of same-sex Christian marriage, one gay person complained about the “enforced monogamy” that this entailed. This is only one of many complex and messy issues that surrounds the proposed change, but life is complex and messy. Christianity recognises that, and at its best it seeks to nurture the most favourable social conditions for human flourishing and for care for the vulnerable within the muddle and mess of our human fallibility.

- continued at Comment is free, Guardian.

Austen Ivereigh:

Across the channel, in one of the most remarkable civil-society revolts of modern times, close to a million people took to the Paris streets last month to protest against same-sex marriage. In the UK, on the other hand, a great silence supervenes; the media barely consider it worth debating. The “equality” frame, expertly constructed by Stonewall’s lawyers, has silenced us: who dares to favour “discrimination”? But the hard questions about the drive to gay marriage must still be faced.

At present the law recognises a marriage as unique and different from all other forms of love and commitment – and it “discriminates” against those unable to meet its norms, in order to preserve that meaning. Marriage of a man and a woman is the only environment capable of generating new life and giving children the opportunity of being raised by their birth parents. All the other elements of marriage – sexual exclusivity, sexual difference, lifelong commitment, cohabitation – support that environment. The government’s new definition strips from marriage sexual difference, and indeed sex itself, as well as any link to children; it defines marriage as a mere domestic partnership of any two people. And it enshrines a new principle: that sexual difference doesn’t matter.

- continued at Comment is free, Guardian.