Marriage III: An Excerpt from Facebook
Whoa! Brandon & Zach, I enjoyed the read. I feel you guys are talking past one another. As to our government, we are a republic and we are a representative democracy. Our states have elements of pure democracy such as issuing propositions and recalls on ballots. We are all these things. But to the issue: gay marriage. My brother-in-law and I have, somewhat slowly, been writing on (broadly) marriage. Here is where we started: “the need to define, for society, what is the purpose, the ultimate end, of marriage. In addition what is worth honoring, according to society?” My brother-in-law fans on the conservative side. Here’s a quote from him:
“So, as a Christian male, my view and practice of marriage is dominated by my religion. Marriage for te Christian is sacred because it is a symbol of mankind’s relationship with God. Throughout The Old and New Testament this is true. The nation of Israel is condemned repeatedly in terms of harlotry or other terms of unfaithfulness. In the New Testament as well, the church is referred to as the “Bride of Christ” multiple times, and the celebration in heaven at the end of the world is a wedding feast. So, marriage—my marriage—is a symbol to me of a very large component of my worldview: spirituality, theology, history, eschatology, etc.” In American culture, marriage is valued because it confirms relationships; it is a public commitment for a couple. It legitimizes those relationships, contracting them with the state. It also grants rights to people because of their relationship. My wife as the right to my money and property—especially if I die. It is interesting that marriage as an institution is basically a public declaration of the societal validity of personal love. All of this is to create what I believe to be an important principle for a profitable discussion of marriage: it works from the ground up. There has to be an intrinsic value in marriage that legislation protects. Marriage cannot be made valuable through legislation—it can only be made conventional.”
Marriage equality siders cannot deny the concerns of god fearing and god-loving persons,that they may have about their god’s view and judgment towards society. If we are free to deny those concerns, it is unrealistic for those individuals (god fearing) to be mindful of the concerns of homosexuals. I believe we can bridge these concerns by answering the above question, what is worth honoring? An element of marriage, that I know both sides can agree upon, is that it regulates sexual practices to a monogamous relationship between two people in which society, their local communities, and their families can help facilitate. This is one element of marriage, I believe, is worth honoring and one of its purposes: monogamy. And legalizing gay marriage does not necessarily condone it, nor being illegal ceases the practice. For example, the legalization of alcohol, pornography, and the Harlem Shake does not necessarily mean the greater American society, the family, or the individual condones it. Additionally, it is better to encourage an institution that facilitates monogamy. Straight individuals are, arguably, more likely to engaged in multiple partners because of the sexual normalcy (culturally speaking). How often do males brag about sleeping with multiple women in a weekend on a college campus or a high school locker room? Has monogamy, as a virtue, been lost? We need to be reminded why marriage is virtuous and worth honoring again if we are to hope to repair the sanctity of marriage.
I fall under the same speculation as Justice Kennedy about DOMA as well as the concern that the gay marriage debate is new as cell phones and the internet. We as citizen should not forgo our duties in which we leave it up to the Courts or any other few in great places of power. We are thinkers who are interdependent on one another.
Rebuttals? If so, comment section!!