Its historical design is founded in the marriage relationship and thus depends wholly thereupon" (85). Advocates of same-sex marriages maintain that gay and lesbian partners need the legal framework of marriage to provide them with the same protections that are enjoyed by their heterosexual counterparts; however, these individuals already enjoy the same constitutional protections afforded all American citizens. According to Coolidge, Duncan, Strasser and Wardle (2003), any laws that discriminate on the basis of sex are unconstitutional: "All laws that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation thereby discriminate on the basis of sex and thus are subject to heightened scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Since these laws are not substantially related to any important state interest, they are unconstitutional" (209). It would therefore seem that advocates of same-sex marriages are seeking additional legal protections above and beyond those typically provided. This warped view of the marital framework carries with it a fundamental threat to Western civilization itself. "Marriage has always been," Coolidge et al. advise, "and remains now, one of the most important relationships in any culture, causing every society to be based conceptually upon this unit and on the institutionalization of this unit" (85). In fact, in spite of an increasing amount of literature advocating same-sex marriages, Wardle reports that the evidence that legalizing same-sex marriage or some comparable domestic status would effect an overall improvement in the institution of marriage or in society is lacking. "Indeed," she says, "there are substantial indications that legalizing same-sex marriage would undermine some of the important social purposes for marriage and would ultimately harm society" (771). Notwithstanding the inability of same-sex marriages...

Absent any substantive contribution to the essential social purposes of traditional marriage, a state that legalizes same-sex marriages may be committing fraud when it represents a false image of same-sex unions as being comparable to traditional marriages. "This undermines the institution of marriage by implicitly denying and devaluing the unique strengths and unequaled contributions of heterosexual marriage to the critical social interests it serves, and it impairs the integrity of the law" (Wardle 771).
In conclusion, the research showed that throughout history, marriage has been regarded as the primary system of strength and authority; as the institution of marriage assumed social support, it was further judicially clarified and codified as being reserved for one man and one woman. To the extent that this institution is allowed to be eroded by the introduction of same-sex unions is likely the extent to which the social order will be adversely affected in the future, the consequences of which may be as severe as the pundits believe today. Marriage should remain what is has always been: the "voluntary union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others."

Works Cited

Alderson, Kevin G. (2004). "A Phenomenological Investigation of Same-Sex Marriage." The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 13(2):107.

Black's Law Dictionary. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co., 1990.

Coolidge, David Orgon, William C. Duncan, Mark Strasser and Lynn D. Wardle. Marriage and Same-Sex Unions: A Debate. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2003.

Wardle, Lynn D. (2001). "Multiply and Replenish': Considering Same-Sex Marriage in Light of State Interests in Marital Procreation." Harvard…