- Dec 21, 2008
Sex vs. Morality (Warren was right)
The Warren
controversy is over the following statement:
"But the issue to me is, I'm not opposed to that as much as I'm opposed to the redefinition of a 5,000-year definition of marriage. I'm opposed to having a brother and sister be together and call that marriage. I'm opposed to an older guy marrying a child and calling that a marriage. I'm opposed to one guy having multiple wives and calling that marriage."
People are, of course, up in arms about this, as apparently comparing gays to people who commit incest or polygamy is extremely offensive.
Why is it ok to claim incest and polygamy are inherently immoral or unacceptable?
There have been, and currently still are, a great many cultures where polygamy is practiced, accepted, and legal. Obama's father, in fact, was married to more than one woman at a time, which is legal in Kenya.
We are talking consenting adults. You personally may not want to share your spouse. What reason do you have to deprive someone who does?
It is legal, right here in California, for first cousins to marry. Siblings are slightly closer than cousins genetically, which makes it slightly more likely that certain genetic illnesses which reside on regressive genes could surface if they had children together - but we aren't talking about having children. Our sexual morays were developed long before the advent of accessible, safe, effective birth control. Set aside that its gross and weird, and that you personally would never want to do it. There is no objective reason why two siblings, who are consenting adults, shouldn't have sex if they so choose. No one is harmed. It isn't immoral. Its unusual, (because our brains evolved before birth control. We naturally feel its gross, because its better for the gene pool to be mixed up), but there is nothing wrong with it.
So then, seriously, why shouldn't siblings be allowed to marry?
When I first began a relationship with my ex-wife she was, technically, a child. I was an adult, and in CA it was, technically, illegal (had I been 20, instead of 21, however, it would have been legal). Of course, with a parents consent, a 17 year old can get married, and the age of the other party isn't relevant. In different cultures and different times, what age is considered a "child" has varied. There are a great number of countries - as well as most US states - which currently allow marriage at age 16, several at 14 (including 3 US states), and a few at 12. In many cases (including in the US) this is below the age of adulthood. Warren did not specify pedophilia (which implies a prepubescent child) nor the age of the older person.
"But the issue to me is, I'm not opposed to that as much as I'm opposed to the redefinition of a 5,000-year definition of marriage. I'm opposed to having a brother and sister be together and call that marriage. I'm opposed to an older guy marrying a child and calling that a marriage. I'm opposed to one guy having multiple wives and calling that marriage."
People are, of course, up in arms about this, as apparently comparing gays to people who commit incest or polygamy is extremely offensive.
Why is it ok to claim incest and polygamy are inherently immoral or unacceptable?
There have been, and currently still are, a great many cultures where polygamy is practiced, accepted, and legal. Obama's father, in fact, was married to more than one woman at a time, which is legal in Kenya.
We are talking consenting adults. You personally may not want to share your spouse. What reason do you have to deprive someone who does?
It is legal, right here in California, for first cousins to marry. Siblings are slightly closer than cousins genetically, which makes it slightly more likely that certain genetic illnesses which reside on regressive genes could surface if they had children together - but we aren't talking about having children. Our sexual morays were developed long before the advent of accessible, safe, effective birth control. Set aside that its gross and weird, and that you personally would never want to do it. There is no objective reason why two siblings, who are consenting adults, shouldn't have sex if they so choose. No one is harmed. It isn't immoral. Its unusual, (because our brains evolved before birth control. We naturally feel its gross, because its better for the gene pool to be mixed up), but there is nothing wrong with it.
So then, seriously, why shouldn't siblings be allowed to marry?
When I first began a relationship with my ex-wife she was, technically, a child. I was an adult, and in CA it was, technically, illegal (had I been 20, instead of 21, however, it would have been legal). Of course, with a parents consent, a 17 year old can get married, and the age of the other party isn't relevant. In different cultures and different times, what age is considered a "child" has varied. There are a great number of countries - as well as most US states - which currently allow marriage at age 16, several at 14 (including 3 US states), and a few at 12. In many cases (including in the US) this is below the age of adulthood. Warren did not specify pedophilia (which implies a prepubescent child) nor the age of the older person.