It is not possible to effectively answer the question the way it is asked. In fact, the way it is posed, the question can only lead to endless debate “for” or “against” the issue. More fundamentally, the question itself is indicative of armored thinking, which is characterized by mixing different realms and depths of functioning. In this case the right of individuals and a social relationship are not only separate functions but one, the “right,” is in the narrower social realm, while the other, “marriage,” is in a deeper realm, one that has developed out of a biological function.
Seen in this way, from the perspective of functional thought, we can look at how each side of the “question” is “partly right.” Removing the debate from its usual moralistic context, we can say that homosexual marriage is neither “right” nor “wrong” and that homosexual relationships can be legally recognized without using the term “marriage” and all it implies and has implied for thousands of years. In this way the legal and economic advantages that heterosexual unions now have can be rationally extended while still keeping intact the deeper biological function.
Employing this resolution takes any emotional plague, from either those on the right or the left, out of the equation. By doing so, the plague’s efforts to create confusion and obscure the central biological role of heterosexual sexuality in social life is defeated, and the rights of all citizens can be secured regardless of sexual preference.
Leave a Comment
No comments yet.