Main | Tuesday, September 07, 2010

The National Review On Marriage

The editorial board of the wingnut National Review posted a lengthy essay on same-sex marriage today. Here's a tired, cliched excerpt:
Same-sex marriage would introduce a new, less justifiable distinction into the law. This new version of marriage would exclude pairs of people who qualify for it in every way except for their lack of a sexual relationship. Elderly brothers who take care of each other; two friends who share a house and bills and even help raise a child after one loses a spouse: Why shouldn’t their relationships, too, be recognized by the government? The traditional conception of marriage holds that however valuable those relationships may be, the fact that they are not oriented toward procreation makes them non-marital. (Note that this is true even if those relationships involve caring for children: We do not treat a grandmother and widowed daughter raising a child together as married because their relationship is not part of an institution oriented toward procreation.) On what possible basis can the revisionists’ conception of marriage justify discriminating against couples simply because they do not have sex?
Mrs. Raman Srivastav just tweeted: "This is the single best piece I've read on the subject."

Labels: , , ,

comments powered by Disqus