Monday, February 12, 2018

Same-sex marriage is just so awful - Blame the pill

John Stonestreet (L) and G. Shane Morris
Monday, two more geniuses weigh on on same-sex marriage. Those would be John Stonestreet and G. Shane Morris from the aptly named Colson Center for Christian Worldview. Their joint polemic is titled: “America's Reversal on Gay 'Marriage': What Really Happened?” Oh do tell.

After bemoaning the advent of Will and Grace along with antipathy for Bill Clinton, corporate support for LGBT equality and the effectiveness of the Human Rights Campaign:
But decades before all that happened in entertainment, politics, and business, there was something else that made same-sex “marriage” basically inevitable: the formal divorce of marriage and procreation.

As University of Texas sociologist Mark Regnerus has convincingly argued, “the pill” alone was enough to sever the link between sex and procreation, changing how Americans thought about love and marriage. No longer did those two things necessarily lead to that “baby in the baby carriage.” Protestants, evangelicals, and the Catholic laity mostly accepted that change without a peep of protest.
I hate to break it to these guys but they need to get out in the real world. As early as 1850 BCE, in ancient Mesopotamia, women were using a combination of honey, acacia leaves and lint; a concoction that was placed in the vagina to block sperm. By the ninth century CE, things “progressed” to the use of other materials including elephant dung, cabbages and pitch, used alone or in combination. Most ancient societies preferred smaller families or fewer mouths to feed. Why elephant dung I wonder. Another of life's mysteries.

The point is that people have wanted to have sex without risk of producing children for thousands of years. The rubber was invented in 1855, shortly after Goodyear perfected vulcanization. The pill made its debut more than a hundred years later in 1960 but by that time these were just newer, faster, better (and less messy) alternatives.

As for Regnerus, he is a zealous Catholic convert; an extremist. Regnerus has a religious duty to defend the current teachings of the Catholic Church. Real social science takes a backseat to the catechism.

Eventually Stonestreet and Morris go off the deep end. It is the product of being confined to a self-reinforcing echo chamber while having limited intellectual curiosity.
Fast forward a few decades, removing any remaining stigmas on sexual behavior, and then terms like “husband and wife,” “mother” and “father,” and ultimately, “male and female” lost their defining power. Same-sex unions were then just a very short step away.

Which brings us to today and the news that an up-and-coming generation may be the most pro-LGBT in history. Those of us who believe in God’s design for sex face a daunting task. Reversing Obergefell and rebuilding the shattered consensus on natural marriage won’t happen quickly. But here’s what we can do…
This reminds me of Brian S. Brown from earlier today. They seem to think that their religious disapproval of same-sex marriage is reason enough to do away with it. These folks never provide us with something along the lines of: “Due to same-sex marriage…” followed by consequences. They have been promising consequences for more than a decade and have yet to deliver on what those are.

Whose traditional marriage has been affected, in any way, by gay couples getting hitched? Do they think that if gay people cannot marry, they will enter into heterosexual marriages? That ship with all the beards on board has sailed. How has same-sex marriage affected opposite sex marriage? They never seem to be capable of answering that fundamentally simple question. In fact, I would like to know what they propose to do to reverse Obergefell? If prayer worked, we would not be having this discussion.

Oh but there is an ember of a plan:
First, we can help our children understand what went wrong, especially the wrong ideas about sex, marriage, happiness, and procreation that permeate our society. Second, we can help them know what’s right about God’s design for marriage, sex, and procreation.
I think that younger people are more interested in what went right which included full dignity for their gay friends and family members. You know that in 1965, at the Second Vatican Council, there was general agreement that contraception was an issue of private morality and and required for true religious freedom of all people (not just Catholics). It seems to me that the bishops lost their way rather than society. All it took was a couple of conservative popes and they went back to the Middle Ages.

Mr. Stonestreet and Mr. Morris seem quite content to reside in the middle ages. It was a simpler time. Back then people still believed that illnesses were caused by demons. It was a deadlier time but so what?

Related content:



No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.