A Succinct Defense of Marriage

marriage-cartoon-proposal

This is perhaps the best, succinct argument for marriage that I’ve heard.

I encourage you to watch it several times and then share it with friends.

It was offered by Ryan Anderson to the Indiana House Judiciary Committee earlier this week. Anderson is the co-author of the book, What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense. One of the other co-authors, Sherif Girgis, is a regular guest on Catholic Answers Live. You can (and should) listen to one of his shows here.

Wonder what it must be like to be both a faithful Catholic and a person with same-sex attraction? Read Catholic, Gay, and Feeling Fine by Steve Gershom

If you’d like to listen to a my wife and me answer questions about the struggles and joys of marriage, click here.

15 thoughts on “A Succinct Defense of Marriage

  1. Excellent. Clear and concise arguments based in reason and social science. I particularly like at the very beginning how Ryan asked the all important question, “What is marriage?”. I have found that those I speak to who want to redefine marriage have a difficult time answering this simple question…what is marriage?.

  2. Reproduction doesn’t necessarily require a man and a woman, it could be done, in theory, using stem cells and genetic engineering to produce sperm from a woman or eggs from a man.

    The definition of marriage is and has always been approval and allowing the couple to conceive offspring together with each other’s genes. We don’t have to do that with same-sex couples, we can and should prohibit labs from attempting to conceive offspring together, with a federal law limiting conception to a man and a woman. That would be incompatible with same-sex marriage, unless marriage is redefined to no longer give that approval. Congress should also prescribe the effect of marriage so that the definition remains allow and approve the couple to conceive offspring with their own genes.

  3. Depends. There are some wise guys who think that marriage is a contract to trade sex (define that how you want) and services (ditto). They are cheerfully willing to acknowledge that this fits anyone from polyamorists to animal lovers of a very different sort. It’s all contract law to them. I still don’t know why they bother with the word. I guess because they still don’t think there’s any difference between contract and covenant. Or God, and just some idea.

    But then, it’s easy to argue from a position of not believing in anything– and I’m not even talking about God, but reality, or metaphysics. There’s a lot of that going around, these days.

  4. Lame. This is an argument about making marriage stronger… And a crap argument against marriage equality. Marriage is not all about kids, maybe out used to be. Outlaw divorce and require a license to have children.

    1. There’s nothing “equal” about marriage. There’s nothing “equal” to marriage. Marriage has exclusive traits. Treating different things differently is not unjust discrimination. Marriage is the most efficient way to procreate children, educate them, and provide a stable environment to raise them. Always has been. I find it rather pseudo-intellectual for people to redefine it, based simply on a vague use of the word “equality.” The reality is that this redefinition need is not based on noble causes, like “equality” but rather, money. It’s all about the tax advantages married couples get. But that’s for a reason. Married couples contribute to their society by providing children raised in what has been shown to be the most stable environment possible: Raised by a husband and a wife.

  5. Where is the image of Christ and His Church? Are the Bride and the Bridegroom equals in this relationship which is modeled by the Sacrament?

    That is core in the mystery of Mother Church who begets children. Be a child of God, first. Do this and everything in and about Marriage becomes more evident.

  6. I do believe all the ideas you have offered in your post.
    They are very convincing and will definitely work.
    Nonetheless, the posts are too short for novices. Could you please prolong them a bit from next time?
    Thank you for the post.

    Feel free to visit my homepage … ted s woodworking

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *