Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Catholic News

Home

Home
Catholic
Religion News
Sexual difference critical to understanding marriage, authors say

Sexual difference critical to understanding marriage, authors say

Last updated on: January 10, 2013 at 9:13 am by CNA Daily News

Sexual difference critical to understanding marriage, authors say 2013-01-10T09:13:00+00:00 CNA Daily News

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Washington D.C., Jan 10, 2013 / 02:13 am (CNA).- Defending the sexual complementarity between men and women in marriage is an essential first step in building up a healthy “culture of marriage” as a whole, say the authors of a new book.

“I really do believe that this is a reasonable debate among reasonable people of good will,” said
Prof. Robert George of Princeton University.

George spoke Dec. 19 at the Catholic Information Center in Washington, D.C. Joining him at the promotional event for their book, “What is Marriage,” were co-authors Sherif Girgis and Ryan Anderson.

The speakers explained that while attempts to redefine marriage are based on an understanding of the union as primarily emotional, this is neither the historical nor contemporary definition of the marital union.

Girgis, who is both a second-year Ph.D. student at Princeton and a first-year law student at Yale, observed that marriage, historically and philosophically understood, is a conjugal, comprehensive union on multiple levels.

In marriage, there is a “union of heart and mind but also of the body,” he said, explaining that the physical realities of husband and wife are integral to the conjugal nature of marriage.

It is this bodily union that makes procreation possible and distinguishes marriage from friendships and other human relationships, Girgis explained.

Changing marriage from this definition would be harmful to society, and should therefore be avoided, warned Anderson, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation.

He stressed that “being for marriage does not mean anti-gay” and said that marriage defenders “should be at the forefront” of efforts to oppose bullying and discrimination against those who are same-sex attracted.

However, he continued, supporters of marriage should not allow their position to be called “bigotry,” and they must explain that their position is not unjustly discriminatory.

Instead, he maintained, supporters of traditional marriage should affirm that there is “(n)othing more important for the future of the nation” than a “healthy marriage culture,” particularly for the benefit of children.

Government has a vested interest in protecting and promoting marriage, Anderson said, because of the social benefits offered by a healthy marriage culture.

Outlining the political consequences of redefining marriage, he pointed towards the creation of no-fault divorce and how it has changed society's view of marriage by removing the concept of permanence.

Accepting “gay marriage” would further weaken marriage by removing the understanding that it is a fundamentally conjugal union, he said.

Anderson also noted that if it is “judgmental” to state that children need both a mother and a father, it will become increasingly difficult to promote active fatherhood and could lead to increased fatherlessness across the country.

Concluding the discussion, George asserted that ultimately, the marriage question is one of rationality.

In a culture that lacks an understanding of the importance of conjugal union, marriage seems to be a mere issue of equality, he explained.

However, the implications of redefining marriage are drastic, he continued, because without the element of sexual complementarity, there is no rational basis for rejecting polyamory.

As a result, redefining marriage could lead to a collapse of the term altogether, he said, noting that people “can’t explain why marriage requires exclusivity and sexual fidelity,” as well as permanence.

Promoting the conjugal aspect of marriage is an important step in rebuilding the definition of the institution that has existed in every culture throughout recorded history, George said.

He explained that the strengthening of marriage will require additional efforts, with aid from law, philosophy, culture and religious institutions.

“The struggle to preserve the conjugal understanding of marriage in our law,” George stated, is “only a first step…of the steps we need to take…to rebuild a strong and healthy and vibrant marriage culture.”

Previous Post

January 10, 2013

University employee allowed back after marriage controversy

Next Post

January 10, 2013 California monks build new chapel with medieval stones

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Americas Asia - Pacific Europe Middle East - Africa Uncategorized US Vatican

Select a Month November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was Saul's son?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Jonathan Samuel David Absalom