I've avoided writing on the gay marriage issue because it's either preaching to the choir or at them, depending on the viewpoint -- nearly everyone assumes, explicitly or implicitly, that the validity and logic of their stance is obvious.
This is why this short op-ed,"Joining the Debate but Missing the Point," is worth a read. "For a productive dialogue," author Nathaniel Frank writes, "we should be asking the question this way: is giving gays the right to marry good for society? And to answer that, we must ask what larger social purpose marriage serves."
This is why this short op-ed,"Joining the Debate but Missing the Point," is worth a read. "For a productive dialogue," author Nathaniel Frank writes, "we should be asking the question this way: is giving gays the right to marry good for society? And to answer that, we must ask what larger social purpose marriage serves."
no subject
Date: 2004-03-03 00:10 (UTC)Being neither married nor gay, and never having been anything other than single, nor the urge to be otherwise, I feel unable to muster much insight into the issues -- like the blind man in an art museum, I can at best understand the gift shop and the museum budget, but that's about it.
The situation is becoming both regretable and annoying in that it is both progressively unavoidable and increasingly divisive, while not becoming any more personably comprehensible.
no subject
Date: 2004-03-03 04:28 (UTC)Alas.
no subject
Date: 2004-03-03 07:15 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-03-03 11:34 (UTC)