I Now Pronounce You Adam And Steve

I thought I might address this post I found through a comment made on another blog I read on a regular basis.  It is very short and the entirety of the post is quoted below.  I think it is safe to say the post is in no way intended to be an exhaustive argument against same-sex marriage, and in my opinion is basically a re-wording of the slogan: God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.  This is one of the bad lines of arguments Christians and others who oppose same-sex marriage offer for their view. 

response to same sex marriage advocates: you are all entitled to your opinions as well as I and every other patron on this blog.  But I would like you to consider this before you respond to my comment if same sex marriage were meant to be our world would be a desolate planet, who would procreate anyone neither you nor I would be here existing with no opportunity to say nor debate on what we are now, we wouldn’t exist, thank G God our Creator planned it the way He did.

In other words, if mankind from the beginning of his creation engaged only or mostly in marrying partners of the same-sex, people would not have propagated in numbers necessary to sustain our population, and would have gone extinct.

The argument’s fatal flaw is rather simple.  If the only people who entered into marriage were same-sex partners, it would not negate the fact that reproduction can be achieved outside the marriage relationship.  It overlooks the fact that the actual marriage ritual is wholly unnecessary to the reproductive process.  Of course, the “Adam and Steve” slogan is generally offered to oppose homosexuality, but it can often be found as above in support of traditional marriage.

I do, however, think the idea  behind “Adam and Steve” has merit, but presented as a slogan fails handily.  This is the major drawback to sloganeering, the arguments are designed to garner support for a position using the “YEAH!” factor instead of  offering actual arguments.  The truth is, there are many good, sound arguments against same-sex marriage which do not rest on slogans.

Comments

  1. rautakyy says:

    John Barron Jr, I agree with you in general about the fact that people use too much slogans and oneliners instead of profound argumentation. This has been a growing trend in politics for few decades in the western world at least.

    When other ancient greeks practiced on finding the truth through dialog, the spartans were taught to win a conversation fast by a oneliner. It seems to me that the internet has a way of supporting that kind of conversation. On the other hand internet also increases communication in general.

    In politics, it is the short advertisment messages that also utilize this aspect of rapid communication. To find the fast emotional response, instead of a thorough logical conclusion. It is important to make a note wich politicians use that to influence the masses. To me it allways seems those are the guys with most to hide, or with disingenious agendas.

  2. This is my response to John Barron’s March 11, 2011 message on same -sex marriage in which Mr. Barron states that from the beginning if man had engaged in heterosexual or homosexual relations the world population would not have propagated and would have become extinct, well from where I stand I would say that it never would have gone beyond two same sex partners if it was so meant to be, in other words the human race would never have gone beyond two because it never would have started, and that is a fact;, ask any obstetrician or gynecologist if the human race would ever have gotten of the ground.

Any Thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: