OSC has clearly let his inner bigot off the leash. OTOH, I don't entirely disagree with the position* just the increasingly irrational extremes to which it is taken.
This bit: "... we are fools if we think "gay marriage" is the first or even the worst threat to marriage. We heterosexuals have put marriage in such a state that it's a wonder homosexuals would even aspire to call their unions by that name."
This bit I quite like.
*If one defines marriage as a personal-not-civic union for the purposes of producing and rearing children in context of reproductively favorable gender role system, then by that definition, gay marriages don't support and may undermine the purpose of marriage.
I think, though, that a) most of us do not define "marriage" that way--our definitions are a LOT more inclusive in general, sometimes conflictingly defined or undefined, so it's hard to tell what "our side" expects in practical actionables versus labels. and 2)we can't just agree to disagree about it when one or more factions fixate on owning the label, polarize their position and get all psycho HATE HATE HATE U EVOL HATERS about it.
As far as I can tell, OSC's position has not changed. It just looks more extreme now that the opposition is gaining more acceptability.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-08-12 02:17 pm (UTC)From:OTOH, I don't entirely disagree with the position* just the increasingly irrational extremes to which it is taken.
This bit: "... we are fools if we think "gay marriage" is the first or even the worst threat to marriage.
We heterosexuals have put marriage in such a state that it's a wonder homosexuals would even aspire to call their unions by that name."
This bit I quite like.
*If one defines marriage as a personal-not-civic union for the purposes of producing and rearing children in context of reproductively favorable gender role system, then by that definition, gay marriages don't support and may undermine the purpose of marriage.
I think, though, that a) most of us do not define "marriage" that way--our definitions are a LOT more inclusive in general, sometimes conflictingly defined or undefined, so it's hard to tell what "our side" expects in practical actionables versus labels. and 2)we can't just agree to disagree about it when one or more factions fixate on owning the label, polarize their position and get all psycho HATE HATE HATE U EVOL HATERS about it.
As far as I can tell, OSC's position has not changed. It just looks more extreme now that the opposition is gaining more acceptability.