A LIBERAL CASE AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE?: Matt Taylor replies to Susan Shell
Susan Shell's argument against gay marriage is interesting and well-considered, but it doesn't strike me as "liberal." Take this passage:
"A suitable account of marriage might begin as follows: Most human societies have honored the notion that special responsibility for children lies with the biological parents. This has also been the view of almost all influential thinkers on the subject--including 'liberal' ones. ..."
To start an argument from existing social traditions and the thoughts of past thinkers is fundamentally conservative. I would expect a liberal argument to begin "how should we define marriage" rather than "how has marriage already been defined".
That said, I think Ms. Shell is correct that both pro-SSM and anti-SSM activists have taken illiberal positions. To insist that same-sex unions be labeled "marriages" imposes a particular cultural view on the population at large, just as a ban on all legal recognition for same-sex couples imposes an opposite view. I agree with Susan Shell that, at present, civil union or domestic partnership is the policy most consistent with liberal principles, since it accommodates the widest range of views on marriage and same-sex relationships.
posted by Eve at
12:35 PM | Link |
Post a Comment
<< Home