Marriage neutering activists seem indignant when I write that their position degrades masculinity and femininity. Yet, discuss the issues with them for any length of time, and they prove my point for me by insisting that there really is no significant difference between men and women.
What’s even more interesting to note is that these very people who insist there really is no significant difference between men and woman swear they could not share their lives with someone of the opposite sex, and so bride+groom marriage licensing excludes them by virtue of their inability to desire or enjoy a life with someone of the opposite sex.
So... there is a big enough difference when it comes to their choice in life partners – but not a big enough difference to make a sex-integrated union different from a sex-segregated union, or to matter to a child?
This is the crowd that claims to be all for diversity, but doesn’t think it is important for marriage to have the diversity of both sexes or a child to have the diversity in their own home of a mother and a father.
The demand for the neutering of marriage is built on the mutually exclusive claims that men and women are interchangeable and that men and women are not interchangeable, and thus is bankrupt. The hope of the marriage neutering advocate rests in appeals to emotion.
What’s even more interesting to note is that these very people who insist there really is no significant difference between men and woman swear they could not share their lives with someone of the opposite sex, and so bride+groom marriage licensing excludes them by virtue of their inability to desire or enjoy a life with someone of the opposite sex.
So... there is a big enough difference when it comes to their choice in life partners – but not a big enough difference to make a sex-integrated union different from a sex-segregated union, or to matter to a child?
This is the crowd that claims to be all for diversity, but doesn’t think it is important for marriage to have the diversity of both sexes or a child to have the diversity in their own home of a mother and a father.
The demand for the neutering of marriage is built on the mutually exclusive claims that men and women are interchangeable and that men and women are not interchangeable, and thus is bankrupt. The hope of the marriage neutering advocate rests in appeals to emotion.
If you can provide ANY citation of a same-sex marriage advocate "insisting that there really is no significant difference between men and women" I would greatly appreciate it. Otherwise, its reasonable to conclude that you're inventing a fictional position to argue against.
ReplyDeleteMen and women are different. But this does not mean that only the combination of man+woman is capable of having the kind of relationship that society recognizes as marriage.
Just about every marriage neutering advocate argues that there is no significant difference between the pairing of men and women and the pairing of two women or two men because men and women aren't significantly different.
DeleteBut I'm glad you agree with me. Equality under the law only applies to equal actions and similarly situated persons. This is exactly why it is Constitutional to treat these different kinds of relationships differently.
So, no citation then?
DeleteFYI, a claim that there is no significant difference in pairings does not equate to a claim that there is no significant difference between the individuals.
Same-sex couples, being capable of equivalent actions as opposite-sex couples (in the nature of their pairings) makes them similarly situated to those who may marry. In all relevant aspects.
Again, the claim of equality clearly implies something. You are engaging in bait & switch. They are not similarly situated in all relevant aspects. Sex integration IS the CORE aspect of what makes marriage marriage.
DeleteI didn't mean to imply anything. I'm sure I've said it explicitly elsewhere, and I'll happily repeat it here. Same-sex couples are equally capable of fulfilling all of the things we require of married folks. This is why they are not "different kinds of relationships", even though the combinations of individuals may differ.
DeleteStill waiting for that citation, link, or quote. Where are all these marriage activists "insisting that there really is no significant difference between men and women" ?
"Equality" is a claim.
DeleteThey are NOT capable of fulfilling all of the things "we" require of married folks, including sex integration.
I haven't saved every discussion I've had with marriage neutering advocates. Stop playing games. You know full well this is true.
It's reasonable to cite "integration" as a characteristic of marriage, but expanding the scope to "sex integration" - when you consider the question at hand - invokes circular reasoning.
DeleteAn analogy ...
We know that sodium (Na) and chlorine (Cl), when combined, form the compound we call salt. Sodium Chloride = NaCl = salt.
But don't forget about potassium (K), which can also combine with chlorine to form a salt. Potassium Chloride = KCl = salt.
It would be unreasonable (and incorrect) to insist that only NaCl is salt, or that only the combination of sodium and chlorine can be called "salt". Because, even though the presence of both sodium and chlorine is a characteristic of the thing that most people refer to as "salt", it in fact is not the defining, essential characteristic required in order to be called "salt".
NaCl and KCl are different compounds, but that doesn't make make either one any more (or less) of a salt. In that regard they are equal.