COMMUNITARIAN PERSPECTIVES ON SSM: From Amitai Etzioni's weblog

[So apparently I managed to miss this series of posts, even though I have specifically looked for Etzioni's take on SSM. So apparently I'm slightly inept. Anyway, the series is well worth your time. Click the links to read the entire posts.--Eve]

first: What is a communitarian position on gay marriage? Marriage is not merely a two person affair, but coming before a community to make a commitment, in terms of its values. But gay couples could do the same, right? Should a community ask homosexuals to accept 97% of their demands in order to have the same rights of inheritance, visitation, social security, etc..? Should this community call their institutionalized relationship a Civil Union rather than a marriage, out of respect for millions of others, just as they wish for these to respect their core value of equal rights? Could Civil Unions also be available to heterosexuals, to further remove any sense of differentiating the commitments that homosexual couples make to one another from those made by heterosexual couples?

second: [excerpts from emails to Etzioni:]
"...Bottom line. Get government out of the religious marriage business and into what a government should do, provide a legal system to uphold contracts between people. In the eyes of the law we should change the name for everyone. The government should leave the religious ceremony, called marriage, for the religions."

"While I understand the feelings of those heterosexuals who want to privilege their marriages by denying lesbians and gays the same status, civil union is basically a separate-but-unequal proposal. ...In any event, legally, civil union is poor second best, since many federal and state benefits are tied into marriage (e.g. Social Security), and several state courts have already refused to recognize Vermont civil unions in other states."

third: [more email excerpts:] "A communitarian position on gay marriage? Communitarians assume that humans are communal by nature--social, political, interdependent. Our relationships constitute the center of life. A meaningful and good life becomes possible only through relationships. Indeed the best things in life arise out of love. If that be so, such lives--including their social and legal endorsement--ought to be accessible to all. That includes those whose sexuality inclines them differently, so that what is natural to most would be unnatural to them. The blessings and virtues of marriage--attested by one who has just celebrated his 40th wedding anniversary--ought not to be denied to some who are different. To flourish and be sustained we simply need more than a liaison or a contract. We need a covenant of unconditional loyalty and solidarity affirmed publicly and legally. To be sure, the language needs adjusting. 'Husband/wife' are not adaptable. And leaving 'marriage' to its traditional meaning would not only serve clarity but be a conciliating nod to the more conservative among us. But adapting and extending the goodness of this covenant, while startling some, will neither harm this timeless institution nor deprive anyone of its blessings."

fourth: [final email excerpt] "Since it is in the interest of society to regulate sexual relationships (to limit promiscuity that leads to disease, and to protect the upbringing of children) I think domestic partnerships should be allowed. Indeed, there is a need to make the breaking up of such contracts more difficult than how we allow divorce nowadays..

"However, the problem with gay marriage is not really homosexuality per se but the false idea that gender does not matter, that gender is a social construct not a reality. ...

"A third problem is that male gay marriage (as opposed to lesbian marriage) are 'open marriages' which rarely include sexual fidelity. Society 'rewards' marriage with perks because even today's weakened idea of marriage is understood to include the idea of sexual fidelity. Unless male gays who marry agree to fidelity, it means such a law allows marriage to be whatever the two people say it means..."
posted by Eve at 5:10 PM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home