No, you brought it up - not a red herring. If you are using 'rearing of children' and 'traditional procreation' then you need to address 'current' definition of many parents/many grandparents in your marriage equation. We have redefined how marriage is viewed, just with the overwhelming acceptance of divorce. It is no longer - forever and ever, til death do we part. It is 'until something better comes along.' Society has redefined marriage already, here, in the United States, and pretty much everywhere...
The "acceptance of divorce" says
nothing about how society views marriage with regards to children. It only says how easy it is for a divorce and how permenant they view marriage as.
Frank Turek
writes:
No-fault divorce laws began in one state, California, and then spread to rest of the country. Those liberalized divorce laws helped change our attitudes and behaviors about the permanence of marriage. There’s no question that liberalized marriage laws will help change our attitudes and behaviors about the purpose of marriage...
...Contrary to what homosexual activists assume, the state doesn’t endorse marriage because people have feelings for one another. The state endorses marriage primarily because of what marriage does for children and in turn society. Society gets no benefit by redefining marriage to include homosexual relationships, only harm as the connection to illegitimacy shows. But the very future of children and a civilized society depends on stable marriages between men and women. That’s why, regardless of what you think about homosexuality, the two types of relationships should never be legally equated.
Attitudes toward marriage have changed some, but clearly, the vast majority of society still defines marriage as between a man and a woman and it is still tied to the idea of procreation and child rearing. That was the reason marriage was created in the first place. As David Blankenhorn
writes:
Marriage as a human institution is constantly evolving, and many of its features vary across groups and cultures. But there is one constant. In all societies, marriage shapes the rights and obligations of parenthood. Among us humans, the scholars report, marriage is not primarily a license to have sex. Nor is it primarily a license to receive benefits or social recognition. It is primarily a license to have children...
...Marriage (and only marriage) unites the three core dimensions of parenthood -- biological, social and legal -- into one pro-child form: the married couple. Marriage says to a child: The man and the woman whose sexual union made you will also be there to love and raise you. Marriage says to society as a whole: For every child born, there is a recognized mother and a father, accountable to the child and to each other.
Studies have confirmed in areas where gay marriage is allowed and supported, the views of and attitudes toward marriage are different, and marriage is divorced from the idea of pro-creation and child rearing. In fact, Blankenhorn cites the ISSP survey in
this article.
