What do we say marriage is? Defenders of traditional and gay marriage could perhaps speak a lot more positively to one another if we at least shared a definition. (Let’s leave out legal questions for now, since laws don’t make morality).
Is marriage just two people agreeing to commit to live together and love each other for their whole lives?
Now, let’s really take this seriously part by part. It’s not that simple. Why two people? Cannot three love? And I guess we really mean something sexual by “love” because a group of friends agreeing to live together and love (platonically) isn’t marriage—even if it’s one man and one woman, for instance in the case of a brother and sister.
I think most people would admit that marriage carries with it the promise of sexual exclusivity, so let’s include that. Sexuality is actually very helpful in defining marriage because it rules out platonic relationships, friendships, and arrangements between elderly siblings.
So marriage is an agreement to live, love, and be sexually exclusive for life. But how explicit does this agreement have to be? Ie: what about couples who do not marry in a ceremony or through vows, but nonetheless live together for life as exclusive partners?
Yet, most people distinguish between such cohabitation and marriage on the level of commitment. So let’s add a vow to the definition, a vow being more serious and intentional than an agreement of any other kind.
Marriage is then a relationship between two people, designated by a specific vow, to live, love and be exclusive for life.
But why for life? Why not for ten years? And for that matter, we still haven’t been able to defend why only two should be part of this.
The answer to these remaining questions is tied up in our addition of sexuality to the definition. Continue reading