Can There be a Husband Without a Wife; and Can There be a Marriage Without Either?

If it’s not too much of an imposition, could I get some feedback on this statement?:

In our society, marriage has historically been between a man and a woman. This historical fact has its basis in the Judeo-Christian roots of our country, which has as its foundation the Bible and a biblical understanding of spiritual things. Since the spiritual meaning of marriage is an agreement or contract between a husband and a wife, the contract of marriage between same-sex persons is not any more a valid…

  1. Daniel McDonald
    Jim Ixtian: However, what really pi$$es me off is that the same people arguing against gay marriage have failed to defend “traditional marriage” in any meaningful way for the past 40-50 years…. Until SoCons defend what’s left of traditional marriage, criticizing gay marriage is just laughably obtuse if not cowardly. · 1 hour ago

    I couldn’t agree with you more. I’ve noticed that many conservative pundits/personalities are on their second or third wives.

  2. Joseph Stanko
    Daniel McDonald

    Jim Ixtian: However, what really pi$$es me off is that the same people arguing against gay marriage have failed to defend “traditional marriage” in any meaningful way for the past 40-50 years…. Until SoCons defend what’s left of traditional marriage, criticizing gay marriage is just laughably obtuse if not cowardly. · 1 hour ago

    I couldn’t agree with you more. I’ve noticed that many conservative pundits/personalities are on their second or third wives. · 40 minutes ago

    We didn’t choose to prioritize this issue, liberals did.  Liberals are on the offensive, liberals decided that changing the age-old definition of marriage was suddenly a top policy priority.  We are merely defending the status quo, as conservatives tend to do.  We are standing athwart history yelling “stop!”

  3. Foxman
    drlorentz

     No church can free you of a noisome spouse; only the state can. · 4 hours ago

    Edited 4 hours ago

    I’m generally a limited government type of guy, but, if the above is true, I’m looking much more favorably on the state.

  4. Foxman
    RightTurn: If there’s a defining trait of marriage that precludes gay marriage, I’d say it’s fecundity, not spirituality. A great part of the joy of a wedding is in the promise of regeneration. Two men or two women can form a lasting bond and can nurture a child and pass on knowledge and wisdom, but that element of renewal, which is so deep in our culture and our literature, is missing. · 4 hours ago

    Guess I wasn’t married to my late wife.  She could not concieve.  I’d better go to confession.

  5. Foxman
    Blog Goliard: Forgive me if this is a terribly rude question…but how does one consummate a same-sex marriage?Edited 6 hours ago

    Sex consumates marriage.  If sex can only be between man and a woman, then what is the fuss about?

  6. Zafar

    You need to start splitting hairs about what constitutes conjugal sex (which counts) and why.

  7. Richard

    Whether or not a gay marriage is or is not a real marriage is an interesting thing to discuss (or at least that is the polite thing to say), but I don’t think it is all that relevant to the question of whether or not the state (or a state) should recognize it as such for legal or practical purposes.

    We have these legal entities called corporations, for practical purposes we treat them legally like people in many many ways, I think most on the right would agree that corporations have been pretty good for us and the economy, even though there are people on the left who are hung up on the fact that corporate entities are not physical flesh and blood people. And there was a time for thousands of years that we did not recognize these non people as people, hell we didn’t even recognize all people as people or as fully human. And there were people who were very afraid of the consequences of having this legal entity, and there still are many today who are worried about it.

    continued…   

  8. Richard

    I think a more constructive way to  think about and discuss this issue would be to have an honest dialogue. Ask questions and answer honestly.

    What do you think are the pros AND cons of recognizing gay marriage? And you should try to think of the best arguments you can for BOTH sides. How would it change society for the better? How would it change society for the worse? How would it be good for gay people? How would it be bad for gay people? What could realistically go wrong? What could realistically go right? How is gay marriage like polygamy and incest? How is it different? Is this something that is such a threat that we need to pass a federal law or amendment restricting a state’s ability to experiment? Is this something that is so necessary and right that it must be passed at the federal level disregarding the wishes of the states who have banned it? And so on…

    I think that would be a more interesting way to discuss this issue. I would certainly be more willing to engage in that kind of discussion. 

  9. Keith
    drlorentz

    Pig Man: Can you tell me why someone shouldn’t be able marry the person they love without invoking religious reasoning?

    I agree. Marriage has a perfectly legitimate civil meaning. You can get married by the local justice of the peace or equivalent without going to church. This was true long before there was gay marriage.

    Edit: To further bolster the civil status of marriage, note that it is the civil authority that grants divorce. Marriage has a very specific and binding meaning in family law that is totally independent of any religion. No church can free you of a noisome spouse; only the state can.

    The civil authority granting marriage licenses and divorces is a fairly recent development, especially in the USA. Some argue that it only came about to deny races from co-mingling.

  10. Donald Todd

    I am writing as a Catholic.  That marriage understood as a man and a woman predates both Judaism and Christianity is a fact.  It has roots that are recognized in the natural (or moral) law, as expressed in multiple cultures at various times by writers with no discernable recognition of one another.  

    Would I make it a “religious” position?  Nope.  I would make it a natural or moral position recognized by religion. 

  11. Keith

    Hey Sir! (I’m assuming :-)

    I can tell you why without religious reasoning, but I don’t believe it without that. Marriage is a husband and a wife, the point of my post. Anything other is just a civil union, which I am very supportive of. I am a Christian (Assembly of God) libertarian (Ron Paul/Lew Rockwell/Gary North flavored) and am trying to reconcile my beliefs. It is an interesting thought process.

    Pig Man: Huh?  Can you tell me why someone shouldn’t be able marry the person they love without invoking religious reasoning?  In case you haven’t read the constitution lately, we are not a “Christian” country, we have freedom of religion here and that includes the freedom to not have someone else’s religious beliefs shoved down their throats.   I completely respect you and your churches wish not support gay marriage.   No proposed marriage equality law would force churches to do this.    Why do you religious conservatives insist on forcing your views on the rest us?   Guess what happened when gays were allowed to serve openly in the military?  Absolutely nothing except a few dedicated warfighters were able to keep their jobs. · 8 hours ago

  12. Keith

    I am not criticizing “gay marriage,” I’m saying there is nothing but marriage. And marriage is a husband and a wife. It is a spiritual thing, and I am defending the language. I have no problem with civil unions, and I think tax codes and other laws should be altered to let folks love whom they want. That is how our civil society is.

    Arguing for the language and meaning is all a person can do, and stay married. (26 years and 3 children later :-)

    The problems you state are purely civil marriage problems, IMHO.

    Jim Ixtian: Yet another post on gay marriage.

    Look, I’ve critiqued gay marriage and its negative consequences for society and will continue to do so. However, what really pi$$es me off is that the same people arguing against gay marriage have failed to defend “traditional marriage” in any meaningful way for the past 40-50 years. 

    Social Conservatives want people to take the threat to heterosexual marriage posed by gay marriage seriously when traditional marriage, families, men, women, and children have been getting their arses kicked by no-fault divorce, feminism, and the legal system for the past 40-50 years. 

  13. Richard
    Keith Bruzelius: I am not criticizing “gay marriage,” I’m saying there is nothing but marriage. And marriage is a husband and a wife. It is a spiritual thing, and I am defending the language. I have no problem with civil unions, and I think tax codes and other laws should be altered to let folks love whom they want. That is how our civil society is.

    5 years ago there could have been a compromise there, I don’t think that is likely now. Given the trend lines gay marriage advocates would be doing their opponents a favor by settling for anything that is less than full equal recognition. 

  14. Twofistedreader

    Since marriage is a civil and a religious affair, churches don’t have a monopoly. But, the context of church seems to be where it has the most meaning. That’s why I find it curious that the Left is seeking the marriage designation so zealously.  Marriage or not, they can still lead their lives as they wish. It seems they want the “marriage” stamp, when it harkens back to a religious tradition that they, as a whole, haven’t valued much lately.

  15. Twofistedreader

    Also, regarding the founders, many were Christians, but I think Washington never took communion and theorized that Jesus “swooned” and might have been buried alive.  Not exactly Orthodox.

    Regarding the homosexuality debate, as a Catholic, I trust in my church’s position that marriage is between a man and a woman. Some disagree, and that’s okay. What really annoys me, though, is reductionist “hip” thinking that pervades our elites. They are saying that if you don’t support gay marriage, you are a homophobe and/or as bad as a racist.

    Equally annoying are people on the right who scapegoat gays for society’s ills. Illegitimacy is our biggest social problem, arguably, and that’s the fault of the “breeders”. Most gay people I have met pay their taxes and don’t have kids they can’t afford.

  16. Richard
    Doug Connolly: Since marriage is a civil and a religious affair, churches don’t have a monopoly. But, the context of church seems to be where it has the most meaning. That’s why I find it curious that the Left is seeking the marriage designation so zealously.  Marriage or not, they can still lead their lives as they wish. It seems they want the “marriage” stamp, when it harkens back to a religious tradition that they, as a whole…

    I don’t think it is just the left who favor gay marriage. There are many Libertarians and Conservatives who favor gay marriage, I’m sure that they wouldn’t argue that their position isn’t contrary or any way inconsistent with their world view or political philosophy. Actually I think the opposition on the right to gay marriage is more Christian (or a dominate brand of Christianity) and small “c” conservative than it is Conservative. I would think a Conservative would want gay couples to model their relationship after marriage as much as possible. 

    Also I can this of several impediments for a couple being able to live their life as they wish without state recognition of their marriage. 

  17. Becky53

    Those in favor of gay marriage always bring up love as though it is tied to marriage in some absolute fashion.  It isn’t.  Marriage is a contract between and man and a woman — honor and cherish are words that are used in the ceremony.  Both honoring and cherishing lead the man and woman together into a marriage where love can bloom.  Only recently has our society become so wealthy, healthy and safe that marriage is equated with Love.  I know people are going to argue that Love is the driving force of marriage, but it isn’t.  It is socially stabilizing that people of opposite sex who potentially create children and who establish households of land ownership, marry each other.  It has had a history of creating heirs for land ownership.  Marriage is not borne of a sentiment of Love — that reduces it to cheap and tawdry notions in comparison to the big picture of social stability.  Wars commence over land ownership etc.   If a society wants to muck around with homosexuals unionizing, it should call itself a civil union because it is based on civil society’s definition of a facsimile of marriage,  rather than the biblical/traditional. 

  18. Barkha Herman

    @Becky53  - so if it’s a contract, love or not, why restrict it to man and woman?

  19. Richard
    Becky53:  If a society wants to muck around with homosexuals unionizing, it should call itself a civil union because it is based on civil society’s definition of a facsimile of marriage,  rather than the biblical/traditional.  · 2 minutes ago

    Is it safe to assume that you are not in favor of society “muck”ing “around with homosexual unionizing”? 

    Putting aside the Civil Union vs. Gay Marriage debate (which I probably think is less important than do many people on both sides of the discussion), what are gay people supposed to do in the interest of “social stability” and society? Should they remain single? Should they marry a member of the opposite sex? 

  20. Zafar

    Perhaps this is why gay marriage, or marriage equality, has only recently become an issue?  I’m not sure that something that arises out of being wealthy, healthy and safe is a bad thing.

    Becky53:

    …Only recently has our society become so wealthy, healthy and safe that marriage is equated with Love…

Want to comment on stories like these? Become a member today!

You'll have access to:

  • All Ricochet articles, posts and podcasts.
  • The conversation amongst our members.
  • The opportunity share your Ricochet experiences.

Join Today!

Already a Member? Sign In