Citing statistics obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau, Family Research Council Distinguished Fellow Dr. Allan Carlson said that marriage as an institution is "on trial" and merits both public attention and support by policymakers. Carlson, president of the Howard Center for Family, Religion and Society and the author of numerous books on the family, was the principal speaker at a recent discussion on marriage policy held on Capitol Hill. The lecture was the first to be sponsored by the newly formed Center for Marriage and Family Studies at the Family Research Council, an organization that advocates traditional family values through public policy and educational initiatives. Numbers detailing a 60 percent decline in the marriage rate since 1960, a marked decrease in fertility, a nine-fold increase in unmarried households since 1970 and a dramatic increase in non-family households are evidence that marriage as an institution is under attack.

While some groups, such as the American Law Institute, have proposed legislation that seeks to extend benefits afforded by marriage to hetero- and homosexual non-married couples, others like the Alliance for Marriage have proposed measures to restrict the definition of marriage.

At the same time, Carlson said the clamor for access to marriage by same-sex couples poses further challenges to an institution that has traditionally been defined as the union of a man and women. The reasons same-sex couples seek to have their unions legally sanctioned are often the same as traditional couples, including the legal benefits and protection, public recognition and the structure and support of the social and economic bonds that a marriage affords.

Carlson said that other cultural forces that threaten the stability of marriage include the pressures of capitalism, individualism and moral indifference. Divorce, cohabitation and children born out of wedlock combined with a lower birth rate have badly weakened marriage. "Free love," or the union of men and women without formal commitments or obligations, he said, is the ideal of the socialist state. While communism has failed, Carlson said that in some parts of Europe the dream of marriage as free from any obligation, including economic, is being achieved. In a similar vein but to a lesser extent, marriage in the United States is also threatened.

"In Europe, the label marriage survives, but it confers ever declining status," he said.

"This is strange, in light of what we now know through compelling irrefutable social science evidence that marriage is good for society, good for adults and good for children. Traditional marriage is a great and irreplaceable social gift. Every good government has a vital interest in encouraging as many traditional marriages as possible."

While historically reasons for marriage vary from the production of children to public approval and recognition, Carlson said definitions of marriage reaching as far back as Plato have consistently declared the formal and lasting union of man and woman as the defining feature of marriage.

While the definitions of marriage and family are challenged in the public forum, Carlson said that images supporting more traditional notions of both abound. Popular authors on the subject, including Maggie Gallagher, Glen Stanton and Bridget Maher, claim that married couples are happier, wealthier, healthier and live longer than their non-married counterparts. Moreover, compelling research suggests that children born of traditional marriages tend to be happier, fare better in school and are less prone to drug and alcohol abuse than other children.

Even Hollywood, said Carlson, has produced popular films such as "My Big Fat Greek Wedding," "Sweet Home Alabama," "Maid in Manhattan" among others that portray traditional notions of marriage in a positive light.

Marriage, according to Carlson, is "peculiarly American" and has been valued as the foundation of family life and basic unit of society since the nation’s founding. As the basic building block of society, traditional marriages benefit society by producing a more engaged citizenry. Marriage also supports the nation economically, as those who are married are more likely to be educated and gainfully employed, and less likely to require government assistance, such as welfare.

In addition, marriage is a communal event. The vows exchanged by a bride and groom bring families and communities together, thus contributing to the future of society through the renewal of cultural and social bonds.

Most importantly, monogamous, life-long marriages provide the best environment to produce and rear children, who are the future of society. Thus, Carlson said, marriage is necessarily a "fruitful balance of burdens and benefits," simultaneously affording certain advantages and imposing restrictions. Trends such as increasing numbers of homeschooling families suggest there is a return on the part of many families to role specialization within marriage, where the duties of husband and wife are distinct, and away from the egalitarian ideas.

Finally, Carlson said that marriage is political in the broad sense, and the hallmark of true liberty. Quoting G.K. Chesterton, he said, "The family is an ancient institution that pre-exists the state, one that cannot be destroyed, but can only destroy the civilizations that disregard it."

According to Carlson, policy measures that support marriage would include the re-introduction of fault into divorce, elimination of marriage penalty and restricting the definition of marriage to the monogamous union of a man and woman.

Two respondents, both well known in the area of family policy, followed Carlson. Maria Echaveste, former deputy chief of staff for former President Bill Clinton, and Dr. Wade Horn, assistant secretary for children and families at the Department of Health and Human Services, agreed with Carlson on the importance of marriage for raising children and some policy measures, such as the elimination of the marriage penalty. However, Echaveste cautioned against drawing conclusions based on selected U.S. Census data, citing other factors such as geography, income and education as factors that impact marriage. In addition, Echaveste challenged the idea that same-sex unions would constitute a challenge to marriage.