Objection to gay marriage?

We can probably find social precedents for almost any arrangement in the world over 5k years, but not gay marriage. Does that give pause?

3 thoughts on “Objection to gay marriage?

  1. We know that homosexual relationships have existed under both societies that statutorily condone it and those that condemn it. In this sense, “arrangements” of such a nature are nothing new. The term “marriage” seems to be the snag here.

    My guess is that, as marriage developed as a religious commitment, two men or women entering into this sacred union seemed both profane and absurd. In the process of splitting state and religion, marriage—as defined by the state—became a spiritually empty and politicized civil contract. With greater political equality has come demands for the opening of “marriage” contracts the civil privileges thereof to all citizens. “Gay marriage” as a formal arrangement simply never had a reason to exist before.

  2. I think I disagree. I’d go with Aristotle who sees the family unit as the basis of society. The family is the basis of society because it is the means of its perpetuation. Gay marriage doesn’t fit into that equation. It certainly didn’t fit in any way shape or form in the ancient world.

  3. I don’t believe that, on a rational or philosophical level, that tradition and precedence is in itself anywhere near an argument for or against anything.

    We have, historically, perpetuated both wonderful and horrendous traditions and continue to do so.

    Traditional Chinese Medicine has been in existence for a thousand years… that doesn’t give it any weight in an argument over what treatments should be used to treat an ailment.

Comments are closed.