The real reason "marriage" is between a man & a woman

The old slippery slope argument, eh?

If the marriage amendment passes, women will be chattel and forced into marriage by their fathers again?  Seems far-fetched, and rather looney and desperate sounding, just like when people say that everyone will stop marrying or we'll have polygamy or people marrying their dogs if we allow gay marriage or something.

---

by: Imagine @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 14:31:14 PM CDT

Not so much a slippery slope...

As pointing out that "traditional" marriage is being very carefully defined by these people, and it's different than what marriage actually was back in the so-called good old days. It wasn't radical homosexuals who liberalized the divorce laws, changed inheritance laws, decided that wives could, in fact, own property separately from their husbands and weren't required by law to turn over any of their earnings to their husbands. Marriage has been radically redefined since the country was founded in the late 1700s, but it wasn't the Homosexual Agenda (tm) that redefined it.

Marriage used to be an arranged matter between families to pay debts, cement alliances, etc. ("Biblically-defined" marriage was worse, IMPO, since it seems to have been "all the wives and concubines you can manage to keep under lock and key.") The idea of marriage as a voluntary relationship entered in to for reasons of love or happiness is very much a modern invention, not "traditional" at all.

Cranky's point being, I think, not to let them get away with calling it something it's not.  

---

by: KCProgramr @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 14:58:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

my point isn't the slippery slope argument

though that is the argument those against SSM use.  My point was that, if the conservatives feel the need to protect "traditional" marriage, why is it that they're not going all the way back to the original tradition?  Is it because, maybe, they don't all agree with all aspects of the marriage tradition and only want to accept those that suit their purpose without imposing limitations they find unacceptable?  Sounds like you're supporting a bit of conservo cherry picking to me

---

by: ol cranky @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 17:31:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

that's the slippery slope argument

they use the same logic: "if you support getting rid of the man-woman restriction, why aren't you going all the way to polygamy and dogs"?  They think it's a great argument, but it's silly.  Those kind of questions are answered the same way as you imply: "well, we don't agree with all aspects of [insert extreme straw man] and only want to accept those that suit our purpose..."

Unless you come across people advocating for patriarchy and coverture (and there probably are some that do) arguing for SSM by against those is just the same as them arguing against SSM by arguing against group marriage.  It comes across like a weak desperate argument.

---

by: Imagine @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 20:55:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The difference is...

...that the conservatives claim to be supporting an "original" "traditional" form of marriage "unchanged for thousands of years" -- so it's not a slippery slope so much as pointing out false claims.

---

by: M @ Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:43:09 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm new here

where do I click to say that's a most excellent post, cranky?

And how many of you will join me in emailing this blog to Obama?    

You may not be gay, but you may be next.

---

by: LeslieK @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 14:38:07 PM CDT

And after daddy walks little girl down the aisle...

... listen to the words that follow.

Priest/minister: "Who GIVES this woman to be married?" (emphasis mine)

Dad: "I do" (or if it's a particularly liberal denomination, "Her mother and I")

Then the groom grabs the bride, dad sits down and is not heard from again.

I refused for it to be that way with my daughter. I wasn't giving her away, she was growing into the next stage of her life. I walked her down the aisle, hugged her, hugged the groom, wished them the best, and put their hands together. (Then I sat down and was not heard from again.. [grin]).

It annoys me how this part of the ceremony is still used to assert "property".

---

by: mandt @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 15:26:58 PM CDT

Define "tradition..."

When I and my fiance sat down with my priest to plan the Catholic ceremony (not a Mass, since not only isn't his family Catholic, but about 75% of the guest list - we thought it was more courteous to not have a Mass in which most people could not participate fully), I also said, "No way am I being given away."

My priest said that the "Tradition" in the US and Western Europe really dated to the Victorian era, and that the real Catholic ceremony involves the 2 parties walking down the aisle together, as part of the procession with the cross and the priest. THe rationale is that at a wedding, the 2 people are marrying each other, they are the presidents, not the minister/priest (he just officiates). Therefore, they are part of the beginning procession.

I think at some point the priest asked for the consent of our parents, but that was both sides, and it was more along the lines of, "Who brings this man/woman to be married?" And the response was something like, "We do." from the parents.

---

by: lyonside @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 18:33:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes, I like that.

Both of our fathers were dead when we met. My mother had remarred just a month before I met my husband. She married the man who had been bestman at their wedding!.. Long story but also named Bill, which she said was so handy cuz she could 'just yell Bill!' when she needed help.....They were married 17 years and he was like a mirror of my dad can see why they were best friends though very different.

Anyway my stepfather had 3 sons and therefore knew he would never have to walk a daughter down the aisle. Well we got engaged 3 months after we met, married 6 months later, and yep I aked Bill to walk me down the aisle..My mom said he was a nervous wreck, but he sure looked spiffy in a tux and managed quite well. It was wonderful, talk about a good way to tie two families together!

 

 

It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.

---

by: Orion45 @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 19:18:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

modern marriages

At modern marriages, when the minister asks "who brings this man/woman to be married" there are often eight voices saying "I do"  It is really funny, A bunch of us in attendance almost could hold back from cracking up.  Real nice way to give seriousness and sacredness to your wedding, when it comes from Dad and Sue, Mom and Jack, and Dad and Sally and Mom and Bob, isn't it?

---

by: Imagine @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 21:02:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Between the hets who don't choose to marry and those who divorce

Between the hets who don't choose to marry and those who divorce, how the hell do they get off giving marriage advice to ANYONE?

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 15:34:50 PM CDT

go petey! Talk to ANY school teacher.

Just in discussion with ones in our fairly nice little California college/farm town and they say the percentage of their students living with their two once-only married biological parents is probably below 20% even downt to 10%... Single parents, nevermarried couples, one parent (or both) in jail, with grandparents because of the drug or physical abuse by biologic parents. ETC... its HORRIFIC and probably one of the most important reasons our schools are failing the new generation, because their parents failed them FIRST right from the day they were born.

I would love someone to dig up and put out the REAL statistics and I would personally help to shove them down the religious Righ's throats... or somewhere else. 

It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.

---

by: Orion45 @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 19:05:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Um.. my mom was a single parent...

And I turned out pretty well. My father was around but has issues that have nothing to do with my mother or myself. His ex-wife (way before my time) remarried when their 3 kids were young and that also worked out OK. I know other people raised by grandparents, uncles/aunts, siblings, etc. who aren't failures, thanks.

Are you seriously conflating single parenthood, grandparents as primary caregivers, etc. with parental abuse and neglect and saying that it's all horrific and that every parent failed?? Cause really, damn - that's a really broad brush, and a lot of different and nuanced situations.

---

by: lyonside @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 21:44:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Don't pounce yet Lyon

But I think Orion needs to clarify. I have read several of Orion's posts and cannot imagine that they would ever assume two parents are inherently better for child rearing over single parents. I think his brain was moving at the speed of light and his hands at Mach 1.

At least I hope so, my father was killed 3 months before I was born and I was raised by a single mom in the early seventies. Though it was not common in schools at the time, I still had peers in my situation due to Vietnam. We all would have made our Dad's proud, I know for a fact our mom's are.

But if he did mean single parents suck, I'm right behind you and I'll be shaking my big ole can of whoop ass.

 

I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me. Hunter S.

---

by: txwhtboy @ Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 00:59:02 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Great Article

However do you really believe that conservatives will turn their back on this type of rhetoric?

Nope!  Not at all, conservatives will just make excuses or ignore the issue all together
as long as they feel they are saving a few dollars at our expense.

---

by: rachelsluv @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 15:41:52 PM CDT

Dowry

Actually, I always thought the situation was even worse from the point of view of the woman and her family. In order to entice someone to marry his daughter, a father had to offer some sort of dowry (livestock for common folk, estates for nobles). In other words, it wasn't just that women were "given" away; prospective grooms had to be bribed with goodies to take the daughter off the family's hands. Traditional marriage--good times, no?  

---

by: buster @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 16:29:16 PM CDT

Depends on the local rules, which of course vary...

But in some cultures/countries, the dowry was understood to potentially support the wife if the husband were to die and she wasn't able to inherit (due to debts, children inheritances, etc.) In some societies, the dowry was more under the woman's control, which offset at least a little the lack of property ownership and control that most women faced.

I suspect, however, that this had more to do with the whims of the husband and the mores of the society, whether the woman really had control over dower property.
Doesn't make it right, but my impression is that dowry and what it meant varied a lot.

---

by: lyonside @ Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 18:44:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Stephanie Coontz' book on marriage gives a good historical summary

The point is, a good many people say "traditional" when they mean "1950s-style" marriage. They don't mean marriage in the English/ European 19th century "til death do you part, never can get a divorce" way. They certainly don't mean polygamous Old Testament marriage.  

---

by: NancyP @ Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 13:32:26 PM CDT

Marriage Has Never "Always Been"

When I hear the fundies thumping their Bibles and bleating that marriage has "always been" between one man and one woman, I always respond that that must have been interesting news to Jacob, his wives Leah and Rachel and his concubines Bilhah and Zilpah.

---

by: David Goroff @ Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 14:18:34 PM CDT