Quote:
|
Originally Posted by irateplatypus
nearly all of the defense of homosexual marriage arguments base homosexual marriage's legitimacy on the idea that it contains all necessary requirements for marriage (commitment, love, etc.)... but don't recognize that the exact same criteria they use for their argument has equal weight when used by someone who advocates incest or polygamy.
|
This is not true and shows just how effective the slippery-slope strategy can be. There is no logical argument as to why same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry. To accept most of the arguments one would have to believe that homosexuality is immoral/evil. The “definition” and “tradition” arguments are the best attempts at logical counter arguments that the anti-same-sex marriage groups can muster. The pro groups take the bait and attempt to dispel these arguments, with some success I may add. Yet these arguments are actually rather irrelevant to the issue. Traditions and definitions while important can and will be changed or dispelled, they are not a good enough reason to deny some one a constitutional right.
The main argument for gay marriage is that gays should have equal rights. They are alienated from a social aspect of society that has been proven to be constitutionally applicable to them. Yet the government, despite seeing nothing wrong with civil union, withholds the right of certain churches to practice same-sex marriage.
A hypothetical example,
- The government states that divorce is constitutionally acceptable.
- The Catholic Church states that divorce is impossible.
- The Protestant and other Churches accept divorce.
- The government sides with the Catholic Church and states that no church may accept divorce and thus re-marry a person.
- Once a person a married, they may get a civil separation and are eligible for a civil union but may never marry in any church.
The above, in my eyes, is the equivalent of the government’s currents stance on same-sex marriage.
So once again, if same-sex marriage doesn’t harm society and if the refusal to allow same-sex marriage harms and alienates a social group, why should churches not be allowed to perform the ceremony of legal marriage?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by irateplatypus
they do not accept incest and polygamy even though they ask others to accept homosexual marriage on the exact same principle. perhaps there are more compelling arguments for homosexual marriage, but i don't think the ones given hold water.
|
Once again this is a slippery-slope argument. It is possible, to be pro same-sex marriage yet against polygamy and incest. If you validate one, it would not validate the others, they share a common theme but they also have very different circumstances.
It’s like comparing borrowing, swindling and stealing, all involve money coming out of some one’s pocket but that doesn’t mean all actions are on the same level. While each action may seem black and white they are actually rather complex issues that have overlapping nuances.