It is with great excitement that I share with you “What is Marriage?” Just released by Dr. Robert George (Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University), Sherif Girgis, and Ryan Anderson, this essay reflects on both the nature of marriage, and once identified, the implications of that for the gay marriage issue. This article is one of the BEST arguments there is out there at the moment making the case for the conjugal view of marriage.
I encourage you to spread it far and wide! This breaking new article ”What is Marriage?” appears in the new issue of the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.
Without a doubt, one of – if not the best – argument there is out there at the moment making the case (without any appeal to religion) that society has strong reasons to recognize opposite-sex unions but not same-sex unions as civil marriages.
Already read it? What did you think??
Here is a glimpse into the contents:
WHAT IS MARRIAGE?
SHERIF GIRGIS, ROBERT P. GEORGE, & RYAN T. ANDERSON
PART ONE ……………………………………………………………………..248
A. Equality, Justice, and the Heart of the Debate …………………………………………..248
B. Real Marriage Is-And Is Only-The Union of Husband and Wife…………………..252
1. Comprehensive Union ………………………253
2. Special Link to Children ……………………255
3. Marital Norms…………………………………..259
C. How Would Gay Civil Marriage Affect You or Your Marriage? ………………..260
1. Weakening Marriage …………………………260
2. Obscuring the Value of Opposite-Sex Parenting As an Ideal ………………………..262
3. Threatening Moral and Religious Freedom ……………………………………………263
D. If Not Same-Sex Couples, Why Infertile Ones? ………………………………..265
1. Still Real Marriages……………………………266
2. Still in the Public Interest…………………..268
E. Challenges for Revisionists ……………………..269
1. The State Has an Interest in Regulating Some Relationships? ……….269
2. Only if They Are Romantic?………………271
3. Only if They Are Monogamous? ……….272
F. Isn’t Marriage Just Whatever We Say It Is? ……………………………………………274
PART TWO. …………………………………………………………………….275
A. Why Not Spread Traditional Norms to the Gay Community? ………………………….275
B. What About Partners’ Concrete Needs?……………………………………..280
C. Doesn’t the Conjugal Conception of Marriage Sacrifice Some People’s Fulfillment for Others’? …………….281
D. Isn’t It Only Natural? ………………………………284
E. Doesn’t Traditional Marriage Law Impose Controversial Moral and Religious Views on Everyone?………………………….285
CONCLUSION……………………………………………………….286
12 Responses to HOT OFF THE PRESS: "What is Marriage?"
Thanks for the link – I will check it out!
Pure rubbish. I’m an infertile woman, so my marriage is not a “winning” marriage?
wow, great intro to the article!
Anne:
Insofar as infertility is, strictly in biological terms, a lack of a capacity that the body normally should have, then you are prevented from realizing the natural procreative ends of intercourse. In that sense, your marriage is, metaphorically, not “winning.” On the other hand, though, your marriage is just as morally good as any other, because you are engaging in acts that are reproductive in type, though not necessarily in effect. And that’s what really matters.
Hey now Patrick L, I get credit for a sentence or two of that intro too.
Hi Anne,
I hope you’re having a good holiday season. Anyway, I saw your comment, and I just wanted to point out that this essay actually argues in support of your marriage. George et al claim that your marriage can be a perfectly “winning marriage” despite the challenge of infertility. I would encourage you to pay particular attention to Section D here (pages 265-269), entitled “If Not Same-Sex Couples, Why Infertile Ones?”.
On the conjugal view, as these authors try to show, the marital act can succeed in consummating or sealing a marriage even when the couple does not actually conceive a child. The reason for this is that marriage is good in itself. In other words, marriage, and the marital act that seals it, do not acquire worth only insofar as they lead to the conception of new life. Rather, marriage is an end in itself, a good in itself. Thus even when the marital act does not, or cannot, lead to the conception of new life, it is still perfectly good in that it consummates the marriage.
To see why the infertile opposite-sex couple’s coital act can qualify as a marital act, while sodomitical acts performed by either opposite-sex or same-sex couples cannot, check out Section B here (pages 252-259, particularly 253-255), entitled “Real Marriage Is–And Is Only–The Union of Husband and Wife”.
Anyway, my point is just to encourage you here. On the conjugal view, which I firmly believe to be the view that best explains our experience of these things, your marriage is a winning marriage!! And that’s a truly beautiful thing.
If you have any follow-up responses or questions, feel free to reply to me. I’d love to continue the discussion.
Peace always,
Michael H.
As for that table of contents, it tells me nothing about the quality of the arguments contained therein.
As for the inherent difference between gay and straight marriage – one pairing was not biologically designed to make children, while the other pairing is – you must explain why denying legal marriage to one pairing but not the other has a rational basis.
The simple fact that they are different isn’t sufficient to do so.
Hi RHG. If you click on the “What Is Marriage?” hyperlink in the first line below the picture, you can download the article itself. The Table of Contents was just posted as a preview, but all of the arguments you’re asking for are indeed there in the article. Would love to hear your response to them.
Pingback: Kenji Yoshino: The best argument against gay marriage, and why it fails | Full Comment | National Post
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2010/12/2217
Here is the response from Robbie George, Sherif Girgis, and Ryan Anderson, to NYU’s Prof. Yoshino’s attack on their recent essay “What Is Marriage?”. Yoshino, a steadfast supporter of legally recognizing same-sex monogamous romantic unions as marriages, ultimately fails even to attempt to answer the challenges posed by this essay, and rather than attacking its conclusion in favor of the conjugal view, he simply uses cheap rhetoric to stigmatize those who believe marriage and an intrinsically procreative act are intimately connected. Enjoy the response. Pax.
Pingback: What Is Bodily Union? (A response to What Is Marriage?) | Alas, a blog
Pingback: What Is Bodily Union? (A response to What Is Marriage?) « Family Scholars