A Mighty Two-Pronged Attack

There are two complimentary arguments that frequently employed by those who want to restrict marriage rights to heterosexual couples – if you’re one of these people, you’ve probably used what I’m about to describe at some point in an attempt to make your position seem less blatantly insane. But fear not! A dose of reality is on hand.

Let’s take a look at the arguments in turn, shall we?

1. Civil partnerships (where they exist) provide all of the benefits of a traditional marriage, which means that demanding ‘equality’ is simply quibbling over semantics – it really doesn’t matter what you call it.

2. Marriage, as it is traditionally defined*, is a sacred institution of the utmost importance which must be guarded at all costs. Under no circumstances is its definition to be consciously altered.

You may have noticed a slight contradiction at work there; don’t worry, you’re not the only one. Of course, the dingbats are trying to have their cake and eat it too; apparently, gay couples are too dense to realise that, yes, ‘marriage’ is a very important social convention that they are being actively excluded from participating in.

Strangely enough, I have seen only a bare handful of atheists put forward these arguments – their use is restricted almost entirely to the religious. I’m sure there’s a lesson in there somewhere….


3 Responses to “A Mighty Two-Pronged Attack”

  1. 1 jennysaisquoi December 16, 2008 at 12:40 am

    just wanted to say thanks for stopping by my blog and for the comments.
    i’ve heard the whole “civil unions” for gays “marriages” for heteros argument over and over and that civil unions grant the same rights as marriage, BUT when people have to fill out official forms (tax forms, job applications, etc) the only boxes to check seem to be “single” “married” and sometimes “divorced.” i’ve never seen “civilly united.” and to those people who argue number 1, it’s not just semantics.

  2. 2 Zack December 18, 2008 at 1:57 am

    Not to mention marriage has been repeatedly redifined throughout the centuries, and is different across the cultures.

  3. 3 augustine December 18, 2008 at 1:14 pm

    The anti-equality crowd would say that the ‘common thread’ of marriage throughout history is that it has always involved one man and one(/many) woman(/women). Apparently, polygamous, incestuous, arranged, forced and underage marriages do less to ‘tarnish’ the institution than gay marriages.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Add to Technorati Favorites

%d bloggers like this: