Thursday, June 27, 2013

The Future Of Homosexual Marriage

In light of yesterday's Supreme Court decisions related to homosexual marriage, here's a three-part series I wrote on the subject earlier this year: part one, part two, and part three. Opponents of homosexual marriage need to stop being so secular, subjective, and defensive. They need to include more religious argumentation in their case, argue for their religious views rather than just describing them, stop putting so much emphasis on appeals to tradition and opinion polls and other factors that are so subjective, and go on offense far more than they have so far. I address some of these issues in my series linked above. One of the resources I cite there is Dan McLaughlin's article on the differences between heterosexual and homosexual relationships. If you haven't read the article yet, I recommend doing so.
Posted by at
Labels: , , , ,

3 comments:

  1. Ron Van Brenk6/27/2013 7:13 AM

    Well said Jason,

    Great posts and article. And I like your idea of different argumentation.

    You might be interested in a novel and NOT so novel argument that I posted here-

    http://vanberean.blogspot.ca/2013/06/a-novel-argument-against-homosexuality.html

    and here-

    http://brandatthebrink.blogspot.ca/2013/06/a-not-so-novel-argument-against.html

    Your comments would be appreciated...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jason Engwer6/27/2013 6:26 PM

      Ron,

      Thanks for the encouragement.

      I haven't done much research on the particular issues you're raising. But I agree with the general principle of citing relational deficiencies among homosexuals as evidence against their sexuality and homosexual marriage. I think what you're addressing is an extension of the sort of data McLaughlin discusses in his article I linked earlier.

      Delete
  2. Ron Van Brenk6/28/2013 6:55 AM

    Thanks Jason,

    Knew you would pick up on the 'vital relational deficiency' arguments.

    A xenophobic argument, a genophobic argument but essentially a heterophobic argument. An argument that is self-evident and "tautologically true".
    An argument that needs no data or statistics (though McLaughlin is a great supplement).
    An argument that will be increasingly revealed to this generation (revelation is good).
    An argument that was revealed to the very first generation and will be increasingly revealed to the very last generation.

    Looking forward to the final revelation...

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)