Illinois Family Institute
As almost everyone knows, late last week U.S. Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) announced that he now favors the legalization of same-sex marriage. Portman is motivated to eliminate sexual complementarity from the legal definition of marriage because his son is homosexual.
Portman has received some criticism—justifiably in my view—from both the left and right for the self-serving and emotional justifications for his position reversal.
There is scant evidence that Portman has thought deeply about the following critical fundamental questions, and the public has no idea how he would answer them:
- Does marriage have an intrinsic nature that the government merely recognizes and regulates, or do we create it out of whole cloth?
- If marriage has an intrinsic nature what are its constituent features?
- Why is the government involved in marriage?
- Is there a public purpose for marriage that justifies government involvement? If so, what is the public purpose of the institution of marriage?
- If marriage is solely about love with no inherent connection to sexual complementarity or reproductive potential, why should it be limited to two people?
- Do children have any inherent right to know (and be known by) and be raised whenever possible by their biological parents? Read More.
No comments:
Post a Comment