A Reasonable Alternative to Allowing Gay Marriage


Minnesota just became the twelfth state to legalize gay marriage and it is one of the most widely debated political issues of this generation. More states are starting to allow it and the subject has greatly divided the country. A majority of liberals approve of gay marriage and a majority of conservatives oppose it. While I am one of those conservatives who oppose gay marriage, it is not solely for the same reasons as many others. I believe the Republican Party should not accept gay marriage, not just because of religious views, but because of what the Republican Party is supposed to stand for. Republicans are supposed to believe in limited government. Therefore, I question why they emphasize their opposition to gay marriage only for religious purposes and not for political views as well. It makes no sense for government to be involved in marriage and that is why I do not believe in straight marriage either, at least in terms of civil marriage. Marriage is a purely religious term and makes no sense from a secular point of view. So while I welcome conservatives who do not approve of gay marriage for religious reasons, their opinion would be more widely accepted and logical if they agreed the government should have no say about what defines a marriage and leave that to religious institutions. Now I know there are a few reasons why civil marriage came about in this country and if all civil marriage ceased to exist there would be a few problems that needed to be addressed. First of all the tax system. In many places you are already able to file taxes with someone else who does not have to be a spouse so I feel the easiest and best solution would be to just allow any two people file taxes jointly. It would not matter if they were both men or women, if they were siblings or friends. The federal government would have to accept any two people filing together and there would not be people complaining about not being able to file with their gay partner. An overdramatized issue is for gay people not being able to visit their partners in the hospital because they are not married. Now I do not know the extent to which all the stories told are true, but Republicans should compromise on this that anyone should be allowed to visit a loved one in the hospital whether married or not, straight or not. Another big debate within the issue is whether gay couples should be allowed to adopt children. While many do not believe they should, it would not make constitutional sense to disallow them to. If single males or females are able to adopt children why shouldn’t a pair of them be able to? There are too many children who need a stable home to grow up to turn them down. It might be hard for some people to accept this, but they should think about the future and realize this would be the best compromise and alternative to the current system and other possible future ones. Other than for logical reasons and to make the separation between ‘church and state’ more wide and clear, this idea has other benefits. The Republican Party often does not look good when its representatives are stating their disapproval of gay marriage. Many Republicans and religious persons are probably tired of being called bigots and homophobes, myself included. This could end that hatred towards us and give a more positive view of the party which it desperately needs in this point in American history. Accepting this idea does not mean accepting gay acts, it just means setting law as a reflection of the constitution. In my opinion, gay marriage advocates are right when they say it is unconstitutional to ban gay marriage. Well, I believe it is unconstitutional to allow any civil marriage. Let the religious institutions deal with the issue of gay marriage and let the government focus on what it is supposed to do, protect the safety of the American people and provide basic needs for all of us to live meaningful lives.




About The Author
Zander Wold
Zander Wold is a recent graduate from UC Davis with degrees in Economics and Political Science. He currently lives in Los Angeles and is pursuing a career in banking and/or politics.


X