|
"I am just curious as to the main benefit that a couple would incur by marrying.
(cue 'acceptance' posts)"
To me, it will be most important that my marriage (whether to a man or a woman) be in the church. My relationship with God cannot be secondary to the rest of my life...especially something so pivital as a marriage. I'd also like to a full citizen, regardless of who i marry. the civil benifits matter, too. Marriage is not just an agreement...its a sacred pact between two individuals, their community, and their God. So, yeah. That's why i think marriage is important. Acceptance is nice...its crucial that the community support and honor the relationship that they help consecrate (remember how the congregation says stuff during the ceremony? they're part of that marriage, as witnesses and supporters). I'm not sure what you're driving at...but i wanted to give you the sense that the desire for queer marriage isn't just a tool or ploy....its not just about "acceptance" in some vague and meaningless fashion.
"I might've missed someone addressing this before...but what about incestual relationships between cosenting adults? Would it not be possible for the intimacy and love to be there? And if so, should marriage be a legal option for them? Why or why not?"
I'd argue this. When close family members engage such behavior, it is not so much that they are violating the definition of marriage, as they are violating the definition of family. Yes, it is possible that two, consenting and loving adults engage in incenst. But...i believe it is a breach of the love ethic i was speaking of earlier. Being part of a family...living together, sharing meals, growing up alongside one another...these form a promise and compact. To break those boundaries of trust, and to try to form a pair-bond in that situation is a breach of those promises. To be a good brother or sister, etc... is to my understanding, mutually incompatible with engaging in sexual intimacy. Simply put...it is not possible to commit incest without irrevocably altering, and i believe damaging, an existing familial relationship...thus rendering such behavior incompatible with Christian teaching.
"And indeed marriage between 7 people"
This is why i include intimacy in my definition. Multiple partner relationships do not posess the level of intimacy that two person relationships do. Unless every partner is present any time that any partners are together...there is one or more persons not in the loop for some component of the relationship. Western culture has made several attempts at heteronormative multiple marrage...and none have been terribly durable. For instance...Mormon polygamy limited sexual contact to husband to wife, but has fallen out of favor except in a few fringe sects. Multiple partner marriage isn't about queerness. In its practice, it has been a hetero thing...and has failed at producing cohesive family structures.
|