appeared today in a wonderful Boston Globe op-ed by Pulitzer Prize winner Ellen Goodman, entitled Score One for Cupid. As is my usual practice with the many wonderful pieces I find on the op ed pages of the Boston Globe, I will below the fold offer a few snippets to whet your intellectual appetite, but I urge you to go to the link above and read the whole piece. There is a reason she won that Pulitzer.
The beginning:
But gay marriage is not the cause of the crisis, it’s a consequence. The true culprit is, well, Cupid.
What’s Love Got to Do With It? Precisely. Until roughly two centuries ago, the institution of marriage was considered far too important to leave up to the emotions of two people. Marriage was about economics and politics and, more than anything else, about creating new in-laws.
To see how far we’ve strayed from the rule of in-laws to the rule of love, just compare the 16th-century ”Romeo and Juliet” to the 21st century — forgive me, Will — ”Shrek 2.” In our modern fairy tales, a father is expected to support a love match even if his daughter marries an ogre. Any mother who interferes is a ”Monster-in-Law.”
another on-point snippet:
totally on-point:
As Anne and Chad Gifford, former head of Bank of America, wrote this week in the Globe, their son’s wedding ”brought home the reality that marriage is about two people who love each other and who desire to commit to a life together.”
and the concluding paragraphs:
Conventional wisdom tells us that gay marriage mobilized the religious right and helped turn the 2004 election. But here, as they say, the sky didn’t fall, the Red Sox won the World Series — and public approval rating for same-sex marriage went up from 40 percent to 60 percent.
Over the years, same-sex marriages will be subject to the usual ups and downs, risks and rewards. But now, love has everything to do with it.
I hope this has given you a good sense. But these snippets do not do justice to the piece. Please, go read the entire thing.
