Tuesday, December 01st, 2009 | Author: James O'Neill
The article Gay on Trial: Why more than marriage is at stake in the federal legal challenge to Prop. 8 (the American Prospect) has a great run-down on the current state of the gay rights movement especially in light of the famous lawyers David Boies and Ted Olson taking up the case.
The only part of the article that I find annoying is this following quote:
Prop. 8’s defenders seem most self-assured when speaking in broad axioms. According to the motion filed by the defense in Perry, health care “the purpose of marriage [has] always been to promote naturally procreative sexual relationships,” and “every civilized society in recorded history [has] limited marriage to opposite-sex relationships.” But when asked concrete questions, as the defense was at a pre-trial hearing in October, lawyers have been hard-pressed to come up with an answer.
Gay on Trial, Gabriel Arana; November 23, 2009
If they paid any attention to history or anthropology they would find this statement patently false. Marriage has not, in even a pseudo modern world, traditionally been done specifically for procreative or genetic ends. Marriage has been done for power, land, and influence, and love. The ability to bear children is a natural extension of power, love, and influence.
Historically there have been many societies that have revered or thought nothing of homosexuality. There have been even some societies where sex with the opposite sex was abhorrent and only done with the explicit necessity of bearing children to perpetuate their tribe. The possibility of not having and answer for this I find annoying, because it is easy to refute.