LISTENING CLOSELY: Maggie responds to Dale

Before I respond to both your and Jonathan's obviously sincere moral passion on this issue Dale, I would like to point out that I never said, or believed that "marriage is only for procreation." When you take what I do say, and reword it in that familiar fashion, you are not listening closely. The core public purpose of marriage is to channel the sexual energy and relationships between men and women so that they are not harmful to the children their bodies may produce in making love i.e. so that children have mothers and fathers, and that society has enough babies to reproduce itself.

Nor have I ever said that gay men are just too nasty and promiscuous for marriage. Like virtually every other public commentator, gay or straight, has observed (until it has been deemed incovenient for the marriage issue), what I have said is that a large chunk of gay couples can and do tolerate occasional infidelity on the partners. I said this not in order to say that gays should not be allowed to marry, but to explain why I did not think a legal status with benefits was going to succeed in the goal both Dale and Jonathan have articulated of creating social norms of commitment in gay communities.

I think marital norms are deeply rooted in and grow out of heterosexual bio, social and sexual experience. Because I think this is true, I do not know how to make your project succeed.

Heterosexuality per se is no virtue. If you need more proof than the suffering caused by the breakdown of marriage in America, check out this NYT story today "For Ugandan Girls, Delaying Sex Has Economic Costs":

"The other young women as Lillian's school say they are propositioned just about every day by older men who offer them a chance of a better life in exchange for sex.

The abstinence clubs are popular, with most students prodded into joining by their parents. But many young people, as young as 12 or 13, have already begun sexual relationships. . .

'These big men will say, "Come, get in the care and I'll give you a life," said Ruth, who is 16.

The older men wave cash and cellphones, a sign of prestige in poor communities, and they talk about lives far more glamorous than the ones the girls are living. They do not bring up their H.I.V. status."

posted by maggie at 12:51 PM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home