People don’t like the tough issues. Your average Joe doesn’t want to see an issue discussed that contradicts everything he stands for. Face it, some topics are simply too controversial, too emotional, too fire branded by rhetoric and propaganda to ever be given honest evaluation. Reporters and journalists avoid these heated subjects; they know that when they bring to light any truly radical ideas not only are their careers at stake, but also their lives. Well, here I am, braving the acid-rain storm of truth to educate the masses about a disfigurement to society that has been petulantly ignored across the ages.
I’m demanding a ban on opposite-sex marriage. There’s something unholy about it. I’m sorry, from this point on I will only use factual points and syllogistic logic to verify my argument. It’s so hard to emotionally distance oneself from something so intimately ingrained into our global culture. Anyway, there are very good reasons to abolish this ageless ceremony, all of which have sound foundations to reality. The most obvious place to start is to examine the so-called “economic benefits” of being “married.” The most practical proponents of heterosexual marriage will trip over themselves explaining how fiscal unification as recognized by the state makes said joint party eligible for certain tax reductions. Excuse my French but ce que l'enfer ce que cela signifie? What gives the institution of marriage the audacity to think it can dictate financial interactions between legal parties? Not Ben Bernake for one and I trust him a whole lot more, personally. Want economic advantages? File taxes together with your partner. The state recognizes joint taxes as a marriage contract equivalent. What’s more is that sharing one’s bank accounts only needs the holder’s signature to grant access to other users. Marriage is superfluous in modern banking, joint bank accounts yield the same economic advantage without making a modern blood-oath equivalent that emotionally, spiritually, physically, and metaphysically chains you together for all eternity

Now that we’ve confirmed that marriage shouldn’t be partaken in because of pragmatism, we must investigate why it is unwise from a social, moral standpoint. No one can disagree that divorce is a tragedy. Divorce rates in the United States alone have shot-up over the course of a decade. The clear trend is a mandate. People are dissatisfied with the establishment of marriage. I propose that we stop foisting this establishment upon the proletariat! Marriage is often thought of, fondly, as one of the oldest and most sacred human engagements. Society puts so much pressure on couples to tie the knot, the knot of bondage and servitude, that instead of honoring an age-old tradition they instead are extinguishing their freedom, individuality, and happiness. Wouldn’t it be better if marriage weren’t burdened by the necessities of legal bindings, social obligation, and institutionalized homogeneity? People! Have some individuality! If two people care enough about each other, then let them show it with their actions, not with contracts. Let the global and beautiful heritage of marriage transcend earthly statutes, rise above humanly prejudice, and surpass the dogmatic crater that marriage is marred in.

I appreciate that such a discerning and thoughtful audience is appraising my case against marriage. That perspicacity is vital to getting to the heart of this issue. Some critics of same-sex marriage argue that children brought up by such unions will grow up without the vital presence of the absent gender. I applaud this observation; however, it is a symptom of all marriages, not just homosexual ones. Indeed, the stereotypical American family consists of a mother at home and a father away at work. The mother busies herself with the humdrum of homemaking and the father works long hours, with leisure time spent sparingly with children, instead favoring time allocation for golf, television, and drinks with friends. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics over the course of a 24 hour period, the average working male spends only 1.3 hours with their children. Working women spend 1.5 hours. Obviously, children across the nation are deprived valuable time with their parents. These statistics don’t even account for the single parents in the United States who certainly don’t have children who receive equal gender parenting. “There are approximately 13.7 million single parents in the United States today, and those parents are responsible for raising 21.8 million children (approximately 26% of children under 21 in the U.S. today).” * It is clear that pervasive psychological harm is coming to children stemming from a deficit of parental interaction. Ages 5-18 are seeing skyrocketing suicides, depression cases, alcohol and drug abuse, and other symptoms of social maladjustment. The data suggests that the foundation supporting American families is precarious, and if left untreated, could topple with even more frightful consequences for our youth.
Marriage, by definition, forces certain precepts onto its participants. Married men were originally lords over their wives (marriage by nature being a patriarchal system) and women were condemned to lowly roles, i.e. housekeeper. The designation Mrs. means mistress of, while Mr. means master. This hierarchy infiltrates the modern era where working women are hired less, paid less, and promoted less. Numerous Christian doctrines emphatically demand that women behave subservient to their male partners and bar them positions of responsibility within the church. Families feel this persecution. Insurrecting the institution of marriage will benefit not only our children, but our mothers and sisters. This paradigm can be changed. Without the obsessive constraints and social obligations of marriage, one could still raise a family that loves as fully as any other.
For these reasons I urge conventional marital practices to be discontinued. Instead of waiting for the establishment of marriage to pollute our children’s notions of love, join the petition to rationally seek intervention. We hope to gain the public’s support on this significant and sensitive issue.

*Information from U.S. Census Bureau in November, 2009