The Loom

What is Old is New

Thanks to Wired for excerpting my post on what DNA has to say about one-man-one-woman marriage. When the editors told me that they were going to run the excerpt, I thought at first that it might be a bit stale by the time the magazine came out. But it seems today that the proper form of marriage is on the nation’s mind again…

Comments

  1. #1 degustibus
    November 4, 2004

    Not stale, fascinating, but irrelevant.

    The issue doesn’t have anything to do with science or what the DNA tells us–that’s irrelevant. The issue has to do with what voters perceive as the sin of homosexuality.

    Biology, Anthropology, alas, contribute nothing to the resolution of this issue.

  2. #2 Xguy
    November 5, 2004

    I really don’t see what this has to do with the current debate on gay marriage. Your post seems more like an argument for 19th century Mormonism rather than modern gay rights.

  3. #3 Brian
    November 7, 2004

    Xguy, I think Carl’s point is that people who argue heterosexual marriage is the only moral option because it’s the “natural” option, don’t know what they’re talking about. He doesn’t accept that the predominant form in human history is the only acceptable form of behavior.

  4. #4 The Sicilian
    November 7, 2004

    Or perhaps it is none others business than the 2 humans invoved in the relationship. Marriage is the union and celebration of love, it is a not a subject that should be debated between politicians, nor is it any person’s right to tell any human that they can not marry the mate of their choice.

  5. #5 Xguy
    November 8, 2004

    Xguy, I think Carl’s point is that people who argue heterosexual marriage is the only moral option because it’s the “natural” option, don’t know what they’re talking about. He doesn’t accept that the predominant form in human history is the only acceptable form of behavior.

    Are you saying that a homosexual marriage could be described as natural? How could a non-reproductive form of marriage be considered natural?

  6. #6 Brian
    November 9, 2004

    No, Xguy, the simple point is that “natural” does not equate with what modern societies consider to be moral. People have to look for other foundations for their morality.

The site is undergoing maintenance presently. Commenting has been disabled. Please check back later!