dagblog - Comments for "Undermining Traditional Marriage (Amen!)"

I'm with you, DF. While

Michael Wolraich — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:35:05 +0000

I'm with you, DF. While maintaining traditional general roles is important to the right, this issue has significantly diminished in the past 10-20 years. I think that primary driver is straight up intolerance, no pun intended. Same-sex marriage is only the latest battle in the decades-long struggle for gay rights. A few years ago it was hate crimes, which the religious right presented as "thought crimes." Before that it was employment and housing rights, and the religious right fantasized that "militant homosexuals" would take over schools and recruit children. Basically, the various catastrophes that are supposed to occur after homosexuals' rights gain protection are masks for rationalizing bigotry.

Well, integrating the STEM

Doctor Cleveland — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 20:20:26 +0000

In reply to A well written post, as

Well, integrating the STEM fields seems to have improved, inasmuch as I know women who are great junior faculty in STEM departments. But it will be another generation or two before academic STEM departments are balanced, and there's still a lot of work to do.

I don't think any straight relationship is completely free of the old traditional patterns, atheist; even a relationship that consciously sets out to be the opposite of those patterns in every way is still being shaped by them. This isn't something that happens in one step.

I may be evolved and modern enough to be the primary cook in my relationship, but that's about mutual self-interest. (It is extremely clear that God has not ordained my partner to do all of the cooking.) And I enjoy having a partner who's not just my intellectual and emotional but my professional equal. My male ego can handle that she will sometimes be considered the bigger gun in the general opinion of our profession, and always be considered the bigger gun by some specific individuals. But my male ego can handle that because I also know that there will also be some years when I seem to be making more career progress than she is, and always be at least a few misguided individuals who are more interested in my work than in hers. But if my partner were *vastly* more successful than I was, if he career achievements clearly eclipsed mine, I would need a lot of painful growth and soul-searching. No couple is just free to be you & me. Not yet. But someday I hope that we'll all get to a place where everybody's relationship choices are just choices.

Right. And the question is,

Doctor Cleveland — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 19:12:38 +0000

In reply to People do, and always have

Right. And the question is, can the state tax gay couples differently, or set up a separate set of probate laws? How on earth can that be equal process?

People do, and always have

acanuck — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 21:07:48 +0000

In reply to Undermining Traditional Marriage (Amen!)

People do, and always have done, and always will do, whatever their hearts and their hormones tell them to. The only issue at stake here is whether they have the right to call the relationships they choose to enter into "marriage."

Long before Canada opened up the institution to gay couples five years ago, people had lost their reverence for the term. In Quebec today, more children are born each year to unmarried couples than to married ones. Marriage is a box you check off on your income tax form. As God intended.

Listening to my local NPR

DF — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 20:00:10 +0000

In reply to Undermining Traditional Marriage (Amen!)

Listening to my local NPR affiliate out here in CA yesterday, I heard "Yes on 8" proponents finally answer the question of what harm is really done when same-sex marriage is allowed. The answer was telling: It will result in children being taught that Bobby marrying Billy is just as good as Bobby marrying Mary! I heard this trope drug out several times. It's astonishing to me to see how naked the intolerance is in that statement. They are literally claiming that marriage must be constrained to heterosexual couples because otherwise children will be taught something that they cannot abide - that people, while perhaps different in small ways, are equal in their desires and rights. That's the direct harm they claim will come of this. Their precious children will be taught tolerance.

As always, great commentary, Dr. C.

A well written post, as

Atheist — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 17:09:32 +0000

In reply to Undermining Traditional Marriage (Amen!)

A well written post, as always, Doc.

One thing that I sometimes feel guilty about is that my wife and I have somewhat fallen into the "traditional" roles bit ourselves (other than the whole submission thing, of course). I make good money merging my know-how with computers and physics, meaning that not only does my wife not have to work, it doesn't make sense for her to work unless she's got a job she really enjoys. Because she's not working, she does the vast majority of the house work (her choice, I have never made this suggestion). As a single data point, of course, there's nothing wrong with any of this. The problem is that this pattern is much more likely to exist in our society than the reverse for a multitude of reasons, at least part of which is the tendency for girls to be discouraged from math and science (although maybe that has improved).