For the last few decades, we have been having an intense debate about the definition of marriage. In the courts, a judge may argue that defining marriage as the union between one man and one woman is discriminatory. Sometimes a judge will even go so far as to argue that the traditional definition of marriage is irrational.

But when there is an open forum in which marriage is debated, it becomes obvious that there are certain questions that proponents of same-sex marriage do not want to answer. Perhaps they cannot answer these questions or else they feel they are irrelevant.

One of those questions is how they will now define marriage. The traditional definition of marriage is one that has been part of cultures around the world. It is the definition you would be able to find in any dictionary. If proponents of same-sex marriage want to change the definition, what do they propose in its place?

A related question would be how the proponents of same-sex marriage would justify that definition. You can watch an interesting exchange on this point on YouTube. Ryan Anderson (fellow at the Heritage Foundation and coauthor of the book, What is Marriage) is asked a question at Stanford University. The audience member asks, “Why should I, as a gay man, be denied the same right to file a joint tax return with my potential husband that a straight couple has?”

In order to get to the real issues in the question, Anderson asked him to explain the principle upon which he would extend marriage to same-sex couples, but not to a same-sex “throuple” (three people) or a quartet. The questioner was unable to answer the question but continued to talk about civil rights and discrimination.

The inability or unwillingness to answer such questions ignores the public purpose of marriage. G. K. Chesterton once said, “Don’t ever take a fence down until you know the reason it was put up.” Proponents of same-sex marriage don’t seem to care why a fence for marriage was erected and don’t seem to care about what will happen when we take it down. They ignore important questions and continue chanting about their civil rights.