It is true that it is far easier to argue about abortion because the dimensions of the argument are much smaller. There is at the end of the day only one point in contention. Is the fetus a human being? Both sides agree (mostly) that murder is wrong in all circumstances. Also agreed upon is that humans have these things called "rights" and foremost is the right not to be killed.
Gay "marriage" is a far trickier debate to get into for a number of reasons. Marriage itself and how one conceives it tells a lot about the arguer's world viewpoint. Major assumptions are made and the moral and philosophical frameworks that support the arguments are often unstated and misunderstood by both sides. To argue about gay "marriage" is more often than not a futile enterprise unless both sides work to define the frameworks from which the views come from.
Major points must be discussed including but not limited to:
- The relationship between being and actions
- The nature of the male/female distinction
- The nature and purpose of sexual relations
- The nature of the family
- The nature of marriage itself
- The relationship between morality and law
Over the next few posts of so I will sketch out the various points above and how they pertain to gay "marriage". It is vital that these points are discussed if any understanding between the two (multi) sides can be met.
But the above shows why the fight for actual marriage against the fiction of gay "marriage" is so difficult. It is far tougher to argue with an opponent when the frameworks the two sides operate from differ vastly.
2 comments:
I agree. Even when trying to obtain definitions for what certain words mean, the discussion can get derailed very easily.
We need lots of prayers and help from up above in these discussions/debates/arguments.
Most difficult especially since most people these days are not all that inclined to think about where their views originate. Far too often asking questions that go beyond the specific issue are met with ridicule.
Post a Comment