« Racial hypocrisy is national policy. | Main | "So long mom, I'm off to drop the bomb / So don't wait up for me...." »

March 28, 2013

"Gay marriage was never the issue. It was always marriage."

Sultan Knish: The Deconstruction of Marriage In the world that the deconstructionists are striving to build,

there will be marriage, but it will mean nothing. Like a greeting card holiday, it will be an event, but not an institution. An old ritual with no further meaning. An egotistical exercise in attention-seeking and self-celebration with no deeper purpose. It will be a display every bit as hollow as the churches and synagogues it takes place in.

Posted by gerardvanderleun at March 28, 2013 9:03 AM. This is an entry on the sideblog of American Digest: Check it out.

Your Say

Enlightenment liberals actually believe EVERY problem on earth is due to man-made institutions and conventions. It's not an exaggeration to say they think if only they can destroy enough of these the inner-goodness of all mankind will be realized.

The Mayberry types, however, continue to tell each other how nice it was in the past and are wholly unprepared to defend their culture. Your culture survives if you break 'the breakers.'

Posted by: Scott M at March 28, 2013 12:05 PM

Has the Sultan been living under a prehistoric rock?

Last time I looked, the institution of marriage went straight into the toilet circa 1972 via the Baby Boomers.

If straight folks want to elevate the institution of marriage they need to do two things;

Get married before having babies and stay married while raising their children to adulthood.

Since a majority of us can't seem to manage this simple, most natural basic of society's "institutional" family tasks, I find it ironic and completely ridiculous that we (straight folks) are projecting the demise of marriage and of greater western society on the backs of a sliver of 3% of the entire gay population who may choose to get married if they could.

The fear and anger over gay marriage rights sound particularly pitiful considering the sad state of straight marriage in this country.

Posted by: Daphne at March 28, 2013 2:29 PM

Getting married these days, Daphne is an act of rebellion. Having a lot of children is to spite the sexual revolutionaries, too. Having said that, I'm with Daniel on this. The people against gay marriage aren't really all that riled about it the way they are in France. But even in France the vast majority just don't care, either.

Posted by: Jewel at March 28, 2013 2:46 PM

I left this comment at Daniel's post:

I argue not with anything you say here. But as I pointed out in the Wall Street Journal way back in 2004, gay marriage is not the cause of the destruction of traditional marriage, it is the result of it. ("Save Marriage? It's Too Late")

When Americans decided - and we have decided, this fight was over decades ago - that hetero marriage was not worth protecting in law or social order, the present controversy simply became inevitable.

Sex, childbearing and marriage now have no necessary connection to one another, because the biological connection between sex and childbearing is controllable. The fundamental basis for marriage has thus been technologically obviated. Pair that development with rampant, easy divorce without social stigma, and talk of "saving marriage" is pretty specious. Men and women today who have successful, enduring marriages till death do them part do so in spite of society, not because of it.

Matt's comment is right: "the 'sanctity of marriage' has already left the building.

Posted by: Donald Sensing at March 28, 2013 2:57 PM

"Having a lot of children is to spite the sexual revolutionaries, too. "

A passive form of population control is the Cesarean section: after you get 2 Caesareans, it is ill advised that you get pregnant again. They do these Caesareans at a drop of a hat these days: for the safety of the child, of course.

Posted by: cond0011 at March 29, 2013 3:10 PM

Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)