I found the talk Thursday to be very intriguing. While I understand that what was being argued was good moral ethics rather than whether or not gay marriage is ethically correct, I found the assumption of Justice Kennedy to be worth blogging on.
The assumption, found on page 15, was that those gay couples being examined contained an "immutable nature" which "dictates that same-sex marriage is their only real path to this profound commitment." As I am not eligible to speak to the science behind same-sex attraction, I thought Aaron McLeod presented a great point on the authority of nature/
He said that if nature is what Justice Kennedy and others consider to be the authority regarding same-sex couples, then they obviously do not account for the fact that this same nature does not allow for homosexuals to procreate.
I think it is an interesting point and worth considering in this very controversial topic.
P.S. I commented on Abbey's blog.
I agree it's controversial. I think it's one of those points that society needs to find a middle ground where we can agree to disagree and settle things from that viewpoint. Otherwise we will never solve this issue.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on this. The presupposition of the majority on this issue bothers me quite a bit.
ReplyDeleteImmutable is quite the permanent word. I don't think it was an accidental coincidence.
ReplyDelete