Her speech is effective and sincere, but I reject its premise, one I commonly hear advanced in support of gay marriage, namely that since heterosexuals have failed to honor the marriage institution, indeed have disgraced it repeatedly and failed to act morally within its boundaries, it follows then that we should cast aside the moral/religious basis upon which opposition to gay marriage has most often devolved. One does not follow the other. That heterosexuals have been imperfect in marriage is no rationale for casting aside the objection to gay marriage on moral/religious grounds. Put another way, if the reverse were true, that heterosexuals were exemplary paragons of marital virtue, would supporters of gay marriage then agree that the moral/religious based objection to gay marriage is vindicated? I think not.
December 11, 2009
Traditional Marriage is Already on Fire, Whats One More Log?
That is my satirical take on the premise behind this commonly made argument by gay marriage proponents, articulated here by NY Senator Diane Savino.
Her speech is effective and sincere, but I reject its premise, one I commonly hear advanced in support of gay marriage, namely that since heterosexuals have failed to honor the marriage institution, indeed have disgraced it repeatedly and failed to act morally within its boundaries, it follows then that we should cast aside the moral/religious basis upon which opposition to gay marriage has most often devolved. One does not follow the other. That heterosexuals have been imperfect in marriage is no rationale for casting aside the objection to gay marriage on moral/religious grounds. Put another way, if the reverse were true, that heterosexuals were exemplary paragons of marital virtue, would supporters of gay marriage then agree that the moral/religious based objection to gay marriage is vindicated? I think not.
Her speech is effective and sincere, but I reject its premise, one I commonly hear advanced in support of gay marriage, namely that since heterosexuals have failed to honor the marriage institution, indeed have disgraced it repeatedly and failed to act morally within its boundaries, it follows then that we should cast aside the moral/religious basis upon which opposition to gay marriage has most often devolved. One does not follow the other. That heterosexuals have been imperfect in marriage is no rationale for casting aside the objection to gay marriage on moral/religious grounds. Put another way, if the reverse were true, that heterosexuals were exemplary paragons of marital virtue, would supporters of gay marriage then agree that the moral/religious based objection to gay marriage is vindicated? I think not.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)