REPLY TO EVE'SREGISTER COLUMN: Gabriel Rosenberg

At his new blog, Gabriel writes:

Her first point, that marriage only exists because of procreation, does not explain why same-sex couples should be excluded. ...Her second point does attempt to distinguish between same-sex couples and other nonprocreative pairs.

I have several problems with this argument. First of all, it treats all women (and all men) as interchangable train parts. A child's mother may be replaced by any other woman, but by no other man. All that matters is that there is a woman and a man as parents. Eve talks about the problems of a child being raised by his mother and grandmother, but it would seemingly be all right if the child were raised by his mother and grandfather. It is also clear that some opposite-sex couples marry even when the purpose is not to give a child a mother and a father. For example, when two eighty-year olds marry it is not likely they plan on having children. The fact that people marry for other reasons does no harm to marriage.

What exactly is the harm in same-sex couples getting married? Eve says the harm comes in "sending the message" that men (hence fathers) are unnecessary in forming a family. I'm not certain what Eve perceives the consequence of this message will be. ...

...Under the old message of "fathers are necessary, but any man will do", though, such men still might leave as long as they believe the mother of their children will meet some guy--any guy. More importantly if a man does walk away from his responsibilites, which occurs today without SSM, he bears full blame for his actions. I think it would be sickening to try blame same-sex marriage for his crimes.

more

[Eve says: I will reply soon! But not tonight.]
posted by Eve at 11:50 PM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home