In most public discsns, the issue of same-sex marriage is posed as a simple qutn – for or agast? – where to be for or agast is to be, more or ls, for or agast gay people. Although don’t…
Contents:
- ARTICL ON GAY MARRIAGE
- GAY MARRIAGE: WHY SUPREME COURT GOT WRONG
- HOW A GAY-MARRIAGE STUDY WENT WRONG
- GAY MARRIAGE: THEOLOGIL AND MORAL ARGUMENTS
ARTICL ON GAY MARRIAGE
* gay marriage is wrong article *
5, 2022Follow our live verage of the Supreme Court heargs that ps ee speech agast gay rights.
GAY MARRIAGE: WHY SUPREME COURT GOT WRONG
Browse Gay marriage news, rearch and analysis om The Conversatn * gay marriage is wrong article *
“You’ve got a ton of people who have entered to gay marriag, and would be more than a ltle chaotic for the urt to do somethg that somehow dispted those marriag that have been entered to acrdance wh the law, ” Mr. Lears did not officially stct their members to vote no, acrdg to two people faiar wh the ternal discsns, makg the vote more a matter of personal bloc of Republins who supported the measure amounted to ls than a quarter of the party nference, but that was a far greater proportn than gay rights legislatn has drawn the past om G. ” Her sister, Mary Cheney, is gay and married wh children, and Liz Cheney’s earlier opposn had ed a rift the famo fay.
HOW A GAY-MARRIAGE STUDY WENT WRONG
One do not have to be a homophobe or bigot to believe that the Supreme Court ma a tragic error today creatg out of th air an imagary right for gay marriage. * gay marriage is wrong article *
– where to be for or agast is to be, more or ls, for or agast gay people. Although don’t get much airtime beyond queer unterpublics, there is an adamantly left-wg, progrsive and pro-gay perspective that suggts same-sex marriage is not a necsary good.
GAY MARRIAGE: THEOLOGIL AND MORAL ARGUMENTS
Maria Konnikova wr about a gay-marriage study that was wily admired after s publitn last year but now looks spect. * gay marriage is wrong article *
Lbian and gay muni, and the femist muni wh which they have historilly overlapped, have long celebrated the valu of sexual diversy over the sexual nformy reprented by marriage and the ethil importance of sexual straight-talkg rather than the double-standards so equently observed marriage’s vicy.
Gay men and lbians n sneak around wh the bt of them, of urse, but marriage, as is legally fed, generat ndns for dishonty, disavowal and sexual hypocrisy. There’s a tenncy among s proponents to reprent same-sex marriage as the fal chapter the story of gay acceptance, “the last civil right” as has sometim exaggeratedly been lled. It is large part bee of femist and gay novatns livg that marriage today is creasgly unrstood not as a relig but a social relatn; characterised not by male domatn but equaly and mutualy between the sex; valued not terms of s ntractual basis but terms of s ongog ntributn to a person’s sense of well-beg; and mataed not until ath-do--part but for as long as both parti fd satisfactn .
Rather than adm lbians and gay men to marriage as currently nceived, we should avow more fully the range of optns that characterise a lot of our liv and livg arrangements. Why not support and regnise the alternative timaci that gay muni, among others, have been velopg for s?