Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Gay Marriage: A bourgeois pretension?

I think so too.

Honestly - I don't understand it - aside from financial benefits - why gay people want to be married - and don't even mention adopt kids to me!  I'm no fan of Eve Tushnet - but that doesn't mean she can't make sense:
.
Eve Tushnet, a self-identified lesbian, holds the position that "homosexual activists are merely picking up on a trend begun by and for opposite-sex couples." In her view:
.
.
Same-sex marriage is just the next step in the divorce culture. The belief that marriage is merely the way that our culture expresses its approval of atomistic adults' sexual and romantic partnerships isn't new - it's the same "me generation" worldview that produced "fatherless America."

It is my contention that some leftwing homosexual activists are hungry for approval, and that they're consciously or subconsciously trying to mirror traditions.
.
Approval-hungry homosexual activists who "speak" for the "gay community" like the feeling of dressing up, making vows, and pretending that redefining the "m" word will make them sanctified citizens. Though apparently astute in the art of public relations, many are easily tripped up when confronted with facts. And perhaps, some of them are trying to create "happy family" experiences because of their own wounded backgrounds.
.
Critical thinkers, like Tushnet, by way of contrast, see the dangers in trend-picking causes or romantic imagery traps. One can't simply manufacture or "lawyer" in an institution that grew out of complex ancient heterosexual/religious customs, without inviting problems. - Source
.
Works for me.
.
H/T pewsitters

18 comments:

  1. 'some of them are trying to create "happy family" experiences because of their own wounded backgrounds.'

    I can understand that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Marriage is between a man and a woman period.
    Whatever else "gay unions" are is another matter; and yes, there is something to the "reparative" aspect with those who have had abusive or horrid family experiences. It only shows, in my humble opinion, that all of us, hetero and homosexual, want to belong to someone; to be a part of something "beyond" our own selfish existence; problem is, if two men or two women do not live chastely, the whole thing explodes in their faces; literally.
    It's a whole 'nother thing, these same-sex unions, friendships, partnerships, whatever.
    I'm with you, Mr. Terry.
    It's "fantasy-land" to think that two men or two women can have something analogous to marriage.
    Fantasy.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Works for me too - as part of the subjective attempt "to mirror traditions". Although I wanted to see these words,

    "Same-sex marriage is just the next step in the divorce culture."

    more like, "Same-sex marriage is just the last step in the contraception culture."

    To me it's like the position of one who is lost in serious sin; who has gone years and years making an absolute wreck of his and others lives. Then, when it comes to the moment of repentance, he finds that to truly repent he cannot indulge in pure self-hate - which is something he would rather do - but must stand with some residual scrap of dignity, which is painful for him. Our culture is in that position right now. Marriage is that "scrap" of self-respect, which, if we hold onto, it may well lead us out of the pit. Though there would still be a long way to go from there.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Paul - very good insight - thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  5. BTW, I didn't mean to imply it was OK to live as man and wife, when you're not, just that I can understand the wishful thinking behind it for some folks. I am doing my best to live a good Catholic life in all areas pertaining to the flesh. Well, OK, I could use a food diet......

    ReplyDelete
  6. Shadpwlands - I didn't take it that way at all - I understood your point completely.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Not to engage in moral equivalency, but the same seemed to be true of most of the marriages conducted by the Archdiocese. The Diocesan "Engaged Encounter" weekends, for example, are a festival of religious indifferentism and suburban tribalism.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Good post, Terry.

    I'm no expert, but I have read that the definition of marriage held by most homosexuals is not that of the intention of a life-long bond of love between two people with the intention, if possible, of having and raising children, thus making a contribution to the future of society.

    It's my understanding that many/most permanent homosexual relationships allow for an open relationship whereby either of the partners may, as often as they feel necessary, have sexual encounters with others after gaining permission from their partner.

    I've not read what happens if that permission is denied.

    I would assume that most homosexual relationships don't plan on having children unless one of the partners has already had them in a conventional male-female relationship.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Interesting premises, assumptions, and comments. I think you'd all benefit from watching A Single Man.

    Peace,

    Michael

    ReplyDelete
  10. Michael Bayley: I just want to say this: I do understand the desire that gay men and women have to belong to another; it's just a part of who we are as humans; the problem is, to be frank, is that homosex will not fulfill anyone, ultimately;
    that's the teaching of the Catholic Church and the norms of human life...
    to love another man as a man is something that is normal...but homosex only makes this complicated, sinful and just wrong..on so many levels...
    love another?; yes; love them completely, deeply, but chastely...sex is for marriage between a man and a woman; I know this is hard to accept; but believe me, dealing with both married couples and those dealing with same-sex issues...intimacy means being vulnerable and open to the "other"...not hopping into bed with someone.
    Sounds simplistic?
    Maybe.
    Well, we'll just have to pray, yeah?

    ReplyDelete
  11. You know, my heart is just sick...I've been dealing with this in prayer before the Lord in the Blessed Sacrament for many days...
    how many just want to be loved?; to know that that they are "the One"...who give themselves to someone who really does not want them for ever (how tragic!) nor one who can give them a child (even more tragic)?...the love-embrace that is meant to be "I LOVE YOU FOREVER, I WANT YOU TO BE THE MOTHER/FATHER of my children" is gone...with contraception, mutual masturbation, homosex...
    it's gone...
    a child deserves a Mum and a Dad who have conceived him/her in the "marital embrace"...otherwise, he/she is just a "product" of conception...and the "union" is just a legal matter...
    is that what YOU want to live with?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Nazareth Priest,

    Like a lot of folks here you seem rather fixated on certain sex acts - in particular, "homosex" as you call them - and not the encompassing relationship.

    Does any sex act - gay or straight - fulfill us ultimately?

    To my mind, it's all about the loving and giving relationship between two consenting adults. It's this type of relationship that people find enriching and fulfilling us. For some people, such a life-affirming and life-giving relationship (and I don't limit "life-giving" to procreation) will be heterosexual in nature, for others it will be homosexual.

    Particular sex acts don't guarantee the success or fulfillment of a partnership, nor do they guarantee its failure. It's about the context of these acts, the relationship, in other words. That's what can make or break a partnership.

    Anyway, this is what I've discerned from my reading, my reflection on such things, and my talking to people - gay and straight - who are in loving relationships.

    Peace,

    Michael

    ReplyDelete
  13. Michael J Bayley said

    "To my mind, it's all about......"

    and

    "Anyway, this is what I've discerned from my reading, my reflection on such things, and my talking to people - gay and straight - who are in loving relationships.

    Are you a Catholic or Protestant? If Protestant, I apologise beforehand, for talking to you as a Catholic.....

    Do you submit your mind's discernings ( to the best of it's abilities and a fully informed conscience) to the teachings of the Church? If not, how do you protect it against errant thinking?

    You didn't mention about praying, which is what Nazareth priest's comment ended with as the ultimate solution. I have used my mind to talk me back into picking up a drink so many times, in the belief that I now possess absolute clarity of thought and control over the consumption of alcohol. To date, it's never yet been telling me the truth. My mind is a minefield, no sane person should enter!!

    Personally, since praying the rosary regularly, my behaviours have begun to change without any debate in my head at all. I just noticed I stopped certain past behaviours and picked up new disciplines. I think it's Our Lady, she really is like a mom who would remove bad stuff from the home, but not make a fuss about it, or shout you down. I experienced real joy, for the first time. I know all about highs and lows and this was different. It wasn't dependant on anything else, other than it's own manifestation. ( bit of a big word there, but I find it hard to articulate the sensation). Oh, don't get me wrong, it's not endless bliss, far from it. But I see a way forward, whatever the state of the road as I travel.

    I don't attempt to change your mind on these matters. No human could have changed mine ( I still think a drink is a good idea some days!!). I just think it's important ( for me, vital, literally)to present my mind and it's meanderings to Our Lord and His Mother in prayer, each day. This is something I strive to do, it's not automatic. My wandering mind is like sticky velcro when it comes to forming attachments to people, places, things, and beliefs. My ultimate change in behaviour was motivated in the heart, not the head.

    God bless you and your loved ones.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Michael: "Does any sex act - gay or straight - fulfill us ultimately?"

    Thanks for asking that question, Michael.

    The male-female sex act that results in the "creation" of new human being is the most fulfilling act of a human being. Ask a parent, particularly a first time parent.

    That fulfillment might not last for some because we are weak and fallible people.

    But all societies have found fulfillment in perpetuating themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ray - excellent catch! Excellent and true. That is it exactly - it is the mystery of life.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Ray . . . Unfortunately there are people who have a child or children and don't find it in the least bit fulfilling. Sad, but true. I also think that what you'll find is fulfilling for parents is the relationship they have with their child/children, not the sex act that produced their child/children. After all, parents who adopt experience the same level of fulfillment, even though they did not biological reproduce. So, again, ultimately it's all about relationship, not about any particular sex act.

    Shadowlands . . . I'm sorry that your understanding of Catholicism means that we need to leave our brains at the door. What a betrayal of Catholicism's rich intellectual tradition! If we all thought in this way then, among other things, the Church would still be teaching that the sun revolves around the earth, we'd still be taking every word of the Bible literally, and we'd still be supporting slavery.

    Both my head and heart tell me that the clerical leadership's sexual theology is impoverished. Like the issues noted above, this one too will evolve and change. I remain committed to helping facilitate such development.

    Peace,

    Michael

    ReplyDelete
  17. Michael

    Thank you for your response. I think my original comments would dispute, simply by their content, the accusations you levelled at me,so I won't reiterate.


    I would ask again though,this: as a Catholic,where do YOU go to get your head and heart checked over for errancy?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Michael: "Unfortunately there are people who have a child or children and don't find it in the least bit fulfilling."

    It's not surprising, Michael, that you would have that attitude.

    That's exactly why marriage is not for homosexuals. They're not at all interesting in having children because they don't find them fulfilling.

    Narcissists like homosexuals are only interested in the sexual act and if it isn't immediate and perfect, it isn't fulfilling. That's why so many of them use chemicals to make it "perfect."

    And if chemistry doesn't help they go on to the next partner, often having had hundreds at the end of their lifetime.

    ReplyDelete

Anonymous comments will no longer be accepted.
Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. Be sure and double check if your comment posted after you do the verification deal - sometimes it doesn't print if you made an error.