The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage

The Tech (M.I.T.) - Cambridge, Mass. | Tuesday, February 17, 2004 | Adam Kolasinksi

[rightcoast]

This is an opinion piece that appeared in The Tech, an M.I.T. newspaper.

[Dalan]

Bump.

A very well-articulated case against homosexual marriage that keeps religion out of it.

[Annie03]

Superb article. Thanks for passing it along.

[Callahan]

This was published in paper funded by a public university? I'll be surprised they haven't aready strung this kid up the diversity flag pole.

[King Black Robe]

Great find.

[King Black Robe]

And why is sexual love more valuable than family or friendship love? Why should roommates who share expenses be barred from benefits simply because they do not have sex together? Why should adults caring for other adults -- family or friends -- be barred from all the benefits of marriage?

[stopem]

Excellent article that makes a sound argument against gay and marriage..And it debates all of their arguments citing facts. Excellent! This should be in all major newspapers.

Wonder when our President will amend the Constitution.

Whatever happened to Bush's illegal alien worker program? I haven't heard anything, has anyone here heard anything about it?

[jla]

^

[<1/1,000,000th%]

When a state recognizes a marriage, it bestows upon the couple certain benefits which are costly to both the state and other individuals. Collecting a deceased spouse's social security, claiming an extra tax exemption for a spouse, and having the right to be covered under a spouse's health insurance policy are just a few examples of the costly benefits associated with marriage.

These benefits are already mostly available to homosexuals as "partner benefits". Unmarried heterosexuals are the ones mostly enjoying these benefits.

[Lucky Dog]

This was published in paper funded by a public university? I'll be surprised they haven't aready strung this kid up the diversity flag pole.

You will notice that this particular "public university" is a "technical" one. These types of university generally attract those instructors and students who insist on logic, facts and "practical" results. Hence, if you are going to see any place where (and, admittedly, it may difficult) the practical considerations are held in esteem, it will be a places such as these.

[rightcoast]

I found a source article link; it wasn't there previously.

http://www-tech.mit.edu/V124/N5/kolasinski.5c.html

Admin/Mod, feel free to edit this post's header to reflect this link, if you wish.

Also, The Tech requests the following notice when posting their content online:

This article originally appeared in The Tech, volume 124 number 5, February 17, 2004. It may be freely distributed electronically as long as it includes this notice but cannot be reprinted without the express written permission of The Tech. Write to archive@the-tech.mit.edu for additional details.

[somedaysoon]

One of the best articles I've read on this subject.

[Annie03]

Whatever happened to Bush's illegal alien worker program? I haven't heard anything, has anyone here heard anything about it?


Haven't heard anything. I think it may have been quietly tabled due to the outraged response. Wasn't mentioned in the SOTU address either (as memory serves).

[EdReform]

Ping

What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda

Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1)

[Paloma_55]

I find it interesting that there is a need to keep religion out of it, or a perceived value there.

In the same way, morality is considered to be an invalid justification for argument. As if morality is religious in nature when in fact, many atheists (if not all) have some basis of moral thinking.

"Thou shalt not kill" doesn't have to come from the Bible to be justified.

"Homosexual behavior is a deviant sexual practice" doesn't either.

All that said, I think it is nice to see someone put it in the secular context because it does force the opposition to acknowledge that the case against gay marriage is not simply based upon religious or moral grounds.

[Dalan]

I didn't mean to devalue the religious and/or moral perspectives of homosexual "marriage". I was merely pointing out that the fact that the argument against it can be put in a secular context does have value, when dealing with the forces of social decay.

Indeed, I do believe that modern moral and social values stand quite well on their own outside of the writings in any particular ancient book; this is the only way to pose an argument that the militant secularists cannot simply pass off as "religious fundamentalism".

[EdReform]

These benefits are already mostly available to homosexuals as "partner benefits".

'Domestic Partnerships': An unfair tax break for the (gay) rich.

[EdReform]

Ping

[LiteKeeper]

read later