Euangelion
Over at Jesus Creed, Scot McKnight (who I believe just finished up his second visit to Australia!) responds to my earlier post on Is it bigotry to advocate Gay Marriage but oppose Polygamy?
Scot writes:
Here’s my contention:
In the course of history marriage has been constituted by a society’s fundamental understandings, and those understandings have not always been debated theoretically. Still, most societies think marriage is between a man and woman. Some societies have (and are) comfortable with polygamy or polyamory. These have been traditional “constraints” for what kind of relationships are legitimate.
But if marriage, as is the case with same-sex marriage, is legitimated not by the tradition of man and woman or by one’s religious texts, but instead by a commitment that is then legitimated and protected by a society’s laws, then that society needs laws that distinguish same-sex marriage from polygamy and polyamory.
If the foundation is the intention and commitment of the persons involved, then the law needs to aim at intention and commitment. Hence, while “legal fiction” is not how I’d express it, I would agree that Mike Bird’s argument deserves consideration and discussion.
Just in case you want to know, I’m not suggesting one bit that this is a “slippery slope” toward legalization of nonsense but instead a legal ground issue: what constitutes marriage? The intention of the people involved or gender/sex constraints, etc? So, this post is not so much an argument against same-sex or polyamory but for discussing what constitutes a legitimate marriage — both legally and in a Christian sense.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In