Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

lurkette · 06-29-2006, 07:49 AM

I think part of the problem is how we're defining "marriage." Why does it NEED to be defined as "one man, one woman" just because that's the way it has generally been? Arguing from tradition, history, even evolution, is irrelevant when those things have been discarded in countless instances to re-imagine social order. Look at monarchy, the class system, slavery, laws against miscegenation, etc. All of those institutions used the same arguments used by opponents of gay marriage to defend themselves from rational challenge. There's no reason inherent to marriage as practiced today why it should be defined as "one man one woman."

Look at the reasons for marriage, and you'll see:

- social institution for stability: Marriage keeps society stable because it defines relationships, places limits on behavior, and provides a structure for people to relate to each other. By this definition, including gays in "marriage" would add to social stability rather than detract from it.

- providing an environment for raising children: not all heterosexual married couples can or choose to procreate. All credible studies find gays and lesbians to be as competent as heterosexual couples at parenting.

- public recognition of a private physical, spiritual and emotional commitment. Again, no reason why two people of the same sex can't be just as physically, spiritually and emotionally committed as two people of the opposite sex.

- religious institution mirroring god's relationship with the church. Some religions DO recognize gay marriage, and a particular religious definition of marriage should not be privileged over another through state-sponsored legislation.

Given that homosexuality is widely accepted as a biological condition and NOT a "choice" I can't see any valid ethical reason for denying people public and legal recognition of a relationship that would be perfectly acceptable if one of them had a slightly different chromosome.

06-29-2006, 07:49 AM	#130 (permalink)
lurkette My future is coming on Moderator Emeritus Location: east of the sun and west of the moon	I think part of the problem is how we're defining "marriage." Why does it NEED to be defined as "one man, one woman" just because that's the way it has generally been? Arguing from tradition, history, even evolution, is irrelevant when those things have been discarded in countless instances to re-imagine social order. Look at monarchy, the class system, slavery, laws against miscegenation, etc. All of those institutions used the same arguments used by opponents of gay marriage to defend themselves from rational challenge. There's no reason inherent to marriage as practiced today why it should be defined as "one man one woman." Look at the reasons for marriage, and you'll see: - social institution for stability: Marriage keeps society stable because it defines relationships, places limits on behavior, and provides a structure for people to relate to each other. By this definition, including gays in "marriage" would add to social stability rather than detract from it. - providing an environment for raising children: not all heterosexual married couples can or choose to procreate. All credible studies find gays and lesbians to be as competent as heterosexual couples at parenting. - public recognition of a private physical, spiritual and emotional commitment. Again, no reason why two people of the same sex can't be just as physically, spiritually and emotionally committed as two people of the opposite sex. - religious institution mirroring god's relationship with the church. Some religions DO recognize gay marriage, and a particular religious definition of marriage should not be privileged over another through state-sponsored legislation. Given that homosexuality is widely accepted as a biological condition and NOT a "choice" I can't see any valid ethical reason for denying people public and legal recognition of a relationship that would be perfectly acceptable if one of them had a slightly different chromosome. __________________ "If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing." - Anatole France Last edited by lurkette; 06-29-2006 at 07:51 AM..