Saturday essay: Keep this in mind

A coda on the Massachusetts court's ruling allowing gay marriage.

The critics believe the slippery slope to moral perdition is greased up anew.

It is preferable that homosexuals not be allowed committed unions sanctioned by civil law. They should return to the closet so society is not discomfited. In any event, they should not have same-sex sex. And if they do, we don't want to know about it.

Marriage between man and woman is an indispensable element of social order, the argument goes. We cannot explain how permitting gay folks to marry foils plans by a man and woman to marry.

Gay marriage is, in obvious respects, different from heterosexual marriage. The two cannot be confused if even only one brain cell in the observer's skull is firing.

But the critics must be right, else why would so many see gay marriage as an assault on the heterosexual-based family unit that produces so many children who are gay?

It is not as bad as some of the critics of the Massachusetts court would have it. Millions upon millions of people still believe deeply in marriage. They marry, divorce, and marry someone else.

Does anyone get the idea that marriage as the indispensable social unit is a bit oversold• Not that marriage is a bad thing. It isn't. But there are a lot of bad marriages that wreak incalculable harm.

We ought to keep that in mind.