Michael Ignatieff calls for new discussion on marriage

wedding-rings

Former Liberal Party leader Michael Ignatieff has signed onto the Institute for American Values “Call for a New Conversation on Marriage”. The socially conservative American organization has published this “appeal from Seventy-Four American Leaders” on their website.

The document calls for a new dialog on the preservation of marriage, a refocusing of the american debate on marriage to one of economic impact and away from one focused on the culture war of gay marriage.

The signatories focus on what they perceived to be current problems of the current American dialog on marriage:

1. The current conversation is almost entirely a culture war over gay marriage, pitting traditionalists opposed to gay rights against gay rights leaders and their allies.
 
2. The current conversation treats marriage decline as primarily a problem of the poor and minorities.
 
3. The current conversation on heterosexual marriage focuses largely on the young, especially on teenagers at risk of getting pregnant and on parents of young children.
 
4. The current conversation on middle-class marriage is largely therapeutic and psychological, focusing on gender roles and on “soul mate” issues.

This position is seen as an about-face for the organization and its founder David Blankenhorn, who was a prominent figure in the American fight against same-sex marriage.

A Call for a New Conversation on Marriage: An Appeal from Seventy-Four American Leaders

  • jeremy lund

    What does Michael want to discuss? Like Canada already had defined the issue of marriage clearly. Marriage is between a man and a women, man and man or woman and women. The next step will be to have Canada recognize plural marriage as a religious, cultural and human right.
    Typical liberal! Give ‘em an inch and they want a mile.

  • http://www.facebook.com/brian.mouland.908 Brian Mouland

    Hey Mikey nobody cares!

  • kenn2

    This is awesome.

    Unlike in Canada, where the acceptance and normalization of same-sex marriage has gone smoothly (thank you PM Harper for not making same-sex marriage a political football), the institution of marriage in the US has been kidnapped and raped by the religious right, which has only served to justify the boomers’ devaluation of it, and is turning off yet another generation of young Americans.

    The economic argument for marriage can be mostly handled by granting an equivalent tax advantage to cohabitation, but yes there are many more economic and social benefits overall when people choose to “formalize” a commitment to their life partner with marriage, and that commitment is made seriously.

    This is how the conversation should be. My marriage is my bedrock, my foundation; I could make no better wish than to hope that everyone finds that right person. Regardless of gender.