Moderation Note: The first four pages of this thread were moved from "Is homosexuality unnatural" as the topic of these posts is more about same-sex marriage in a sociological context.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemit
I'm sorry. I don't understand what you're saying here. Please explain.
--lemit
|
Let me take another run at it, lemit.
The cartoon tacitly implies by way of simile that if your dogma opposes unorthodox forms of sexuality (i.e., non-heterosexuality) then you are still living in the Middle Ages. Well, maybe, but such an implication also carries a load of dogma, namely that homosexuals should not be discriminated against any more than left-handed people should be discriminated against. I can go along with that, however, according to one rhetorical extension of this dogma, we should have special laws that give such people equal protection and legal access to all governmentally sanctioned institutions, including marriage. And here’s where that dogma shows through.
At great risk of going OT, here’s where that dogma breaks down logically: there are no laws in America that prohibit either homosexual people or left-handed people from getting married, providing that “marriage” is understood to be a civil union between one man and one woman, which is the orthodox view. Left-handed people can marry other left-handed people of the opposite sex, and homosexual people an marry other homosexual people of the opposite sex. So, whose dogma wins out in this dogma match.
Isn’t that the dogma the cartoon is trying to portray? Isn’t it saying that to be orthodox about such things as marriage you must still be living in the Middle Ages?
