Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council claims scientific validation for one-man-one-woman marriage. "Marriage is a natural institution—rooted in the order of nature itself.
The reason marriage is defined as the union of one man and one woman is because it takes precisely one man and one woman to create a new human life. Marriage is treated as a public institution because it is in the public interest (not just in the private interest of particular couples) for the human race to reproduce and continue into future generations."
Sure, that's why different human cultures have viewed marriage in so many different ways. Clearly this fellow knows very little about biology. Mating just isn't so simple out there, why plants have something like 16 different sex expressions of which just one is "male and female" plants. Harems the norm among many animals, so a sultan's harem can claim the same; it's a natural institution. Pair bonding is in no way the norm, and promiscuity is everywhere! Does Peter wish us to castigate celibates or childless couples because they choose not to reproduce? And when a burgeoning human population can be found contributing to so many of our problems, indeed, is it in the best interests of future generations for the human race to reproduce quite so much? Of course, we all know that none of this actually matters; science doesn't support his position. It's all about religion and religious bigotry aimed at homosexual marriage, but rather than say "my religion makes me a bigot" they try to suggest science supports their position. In the small minds of such people as Peter, the only religious freedom is their religious freedom, and everyone else had better conform. Think carefully about political candidates who proclaim a religious motivation for seeking public office, especially those who say god told them to do it. Fortunately just enough legislators in New York State saw the issue clearly enough, without a religious bias, that our USA democracy took a small step forward. The rest of them would happily endorse their version of the Taliban.
_(cropped).jpg)
3 weeks ago in Genomics, Medicine, and Pseudoscience
1 comment:
Interesting that this post came right after your "are plants intelligent?" post. In a contest between a Family "Research" Council member and a radish, my vote goes to the radish. The illustrious RC Archbishop of NY tells us that God determined the structure of marriage. Would that be Allah? Some of Muslims who choose to be four-wived would disagree with the archbishop. The "natural" argument never works because of so many definitions of the word--is it what is intrinsic to "nature"? To humankind? To a single person? Is it "natural" to wear clothes? Of course FRC's stance is all bigotry and only the thinnest veneer of reason can be applied to it, which peels off at the first inspection. Now if we could only get the media to ignore these loons as they should have all this time....
Post a Comment