Note to NOM: Current Marriage "Defense" Strategy Failing

In the 2004 election, social conservatives used the equality of LGB Americans as a political football to get the conservative vote out by putting same-sex marriage bans on the ballot in 11 states. All of these bans passed.

Then, in 2005, the Louisiana Supreme Court re-instated the state's same-sex marriage ban. In 2006, an Eigth Circuit judge held that Nebraska's law limiting marriage to one man and one woman was not a violation of the US Constitution. In 2008, California voters took away the right for same-sex couples to marry. In 2009, Maine voters succesfully vetoed pro-same-sex marriage legislation.

Well, so much for the argument that legal same-sex marriage causes heteros to stop getting marriage. To the contrary, data suggests that same-sex marriage bans result in a decline in heterosexual marriage rates:

"Data reported by the Population Reference Bureau, a Washington-based research organization that comes up with global demographic stats, show that the number of American young adults, aged 25-34, have dropped a dramatic 10 percentage points between 2000 and 2009 from 55.1% to 44.9%, citing the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey. Among the total population, aged 18 or older, marriage dropped from 57% in 2000 to 52% in 2009."

I am using correlation to imply causation here somewhat tongue in cheek.

But on a more serious note, if getting straight people marrying is of the utmost importance, I do think social conservatives need a new strategy that doesn't revolve around restricting the rights of LGB people, who constitute at most maybe 10% of the population.

Might I suggest an agenda that involves activity and responsibility on the part of heterosexuals?


(H/T shakesville)