It turns out I was wrong about David Cameron's proposal to reward marriage as an institution in the British tax system. A month ago, he said that the new tax rewards he's proposing would make no distinction between civil marriage and civil partnerships. More details here and here:
"I believe that a stable, loving home is the most precious thing a child can have. Society begins at home. Responsibility starts at home. That’s why we cannot be neutral on this.
Now I don’t live in some fantasy land where every family is happily married with 2.4 kids. Nor am I going to stand here and pretend that family life is always easy.
But by recognising marriage and civil partnerships in the tax system and abolishing the couple penalty in the benefits system, we’ll help make it that little bit easier."
I agree which is one reason I remain non-libertarian. And note that the Tory Party's official websites draw attention to this inclusive policy, and the embrace of the notion that gay couples too have a "home".
I believe in the institution of civil marriage as a way to nudge people toward more responsible, committed and healthy lives. No coercion, but gentle social encouragement. And since gays need this kind of support in our relationships as much as straights, of course we should be included in a genuinely conservative family policy.
And that's the difference between the Tories and Labour. Labour wants no special privilege for marriage. The Tories acknowledge the fact that marriage is a vital institution for a healthy society. And that's also the difference between the Tories and The Republicans. The Tories do not see the relationships of gay people as a threat. They see them as an asset. Imagine that. Imagine a conservatism that is not reliant on bigotry and fear and fundamentalism.