I don't need to talk about the "slippery slope" fallacy for now; plenty of you have rebuked it already. Of course, I guess I could revisit it later, but moving on...
nathan1977 said:
This is not an insignificant point to gloss over.
No, it isn't. But I'm thinking that we're not thinking its insignificant for the same reason.
Does this, perhaps, not expose a rather significant dysfunctionality of American Protestant Christianity? Divorces do happen amongst Catholics, granted, whether that be an official annulment or an unsanctioned legal divorce, but is this perhaps evidence that American Catholics have the right balance when it comes to issues of marriage and divorce? A Catholic-sanctioned marriage requires a lot of preparation and education within the church, and a Catholic-sanctioned annulment most certainly requires some level of consulting.
So, on that note...
At the same time, I think that perhaps after 30 years of watching the steady erosion of marriages, the rise of divorce, the effects on the next generation of kids, its effect on families and on society, I wonder if perhaps we ought to spend some time re-emphasizing the core of what marriage is and has been, rather than saying that fundamental redefinitions don't matter.
...let's tie in my comments on Catholicism with the modern state of marriage. Catholicism basically has an institutional structure to counsel on what they believe to be proper marriages and divorces, without the need for state involvement. In other words, their "value" in marriage is an ingrained part of their culture and theology.
On the other hand, I've been to a small handful of Protestant marriage ceremonies, and one, in particular, stood out in that the minister had a peculiar mention of the "possibility of divorce" during a ceremony. Certainly, his intentions were likely harmless, but is the expendability of a marriage just flat-out ingrained in American Protestant Christianity?
Perhaps this is one of the reasons I get angry at the myriad of "excuses" as to why gay people need to, metaphorically, "sit in the back of the bus" while straight people figure out what the hell they're doing in life.
Contrary to Henry V. Jaffa's horrendously homophobic stereotypes, as he wrote in 1992, it is noted that the younger gay generation is, essentially, quite conservative in its family outlook. It is noted that, in overwhelming numbers, that both gays and lesbians are interested in monogamous relationships and raising families, just as one would expect from heterosexuals. As gays become more accepted societally, they're becoming increasingly boring like the rest of us; so all this talk about polygamy and animals and whatever fearmongering nonsense there may be out there, it's just that--nonsense.
The sky didn't fall when marriages started to be out of choice and for love in the 19th century, rather than the forced arranged marriages that were practiced prior to then. It didn't fall when interracial marriage became legalized in the 20th century. It hasn't fallen, since gay marriage was legalized in the 21st century. With all of this in mind, it is still amazing to me how people still allow themselves to be seized with fear of progress.