It’s always a delight when my dissertation research overlaps with issues in the news. And this morning, as I finished up my research for the last entirely myth-based chapter in my paper, I read this in Carl Kerényi’s The Heroes of the Greeks:
We are told that [Kekrops] discovered, as it were, the double descent of human beings, that they come not only from a mother but also from a father. He founded the institution of marriage between one man and one woman, which was to be under the protection of the goddess Athene.
Legend held Kekrops to be the first king of Attica (Athens).
Further evidence that marriage is an institution based on sex difference. This is not to say that it always must remain so, but a reminder that sex difference, to borrow an expression, is at the “historical core” of the ancient (and honorable) institution.
If we seek to expand its definition so that it encompasses same-sex relationships, let’s not tinker with the cultural record by pretending that it has always been a mere union of loving individuals. State recognition of same-sex marriage represents a real social change. And that change should not be treated lightly nor dismissed casually as some judges have been wont to do.
But what about a fundamental transformation that is change you can believe in ?
Remember that change as a policy comes from people who have styrofoam Greek columns behind them.
Kekrops is so-o-o-o old world.
To put it another way, marriage is a “hetero” institution not merely in the sense of heterosexual, but also in the sense of heterogeneous — that is, the husband and wife roles are understood to be dissimilar, and are not interchangeably homogeneous.
Another innovation attributed to Kekrops (as I found from Googling) — he supposedly disparaged the practice of live animal sacrifices to the gods, and instead recommended that the Athenians “sacrifice” a cake baked in the shape of an ox.
Hmmm, replacement of a literal flesh offering with symbolic “flesh” made out of bread — where have I heard THAT before? And can the pagan Greeks claim prior art? 😉
B. Daniel, you keep writing these posts showing the innate heterosexual nature of marriage as if you respect that nature, then you push to change marriage into something you freely admit it never was. WHY?!?! Why don’t you and the rest of the gay community just leave marriage alone?! What is the REAL reason you, a supposed conservative, are so hellbent on forcing gay marriage on society? What is the REAL reason the gay Left wants to do that? I think we both know the answer. Gay marriage isn’t about equality; it’s about hating and seeking to destroy the Judeo-Christian moral tradition on which America was founded. It’s sad and scary that such anti-Christian hatred is making a home in conservatism, thanks to “conservative” gays like you.
Sean-Anna, I’m not hellbent on forcing gay marriage.
I have opposed the Perry decision and have said on, more than one occasion, that I’m perfectly happy with the state recognizing our relationships, but calling them civil unions or domestic partnerships of some such.
If we get gay marriage, as I’ve said repeatedly, it should be through elected legislatures. That’s not forcing gay marriage onto society, but recognizing it in the means the Framers provided for to respond to social changes.
#1. Marriage has been called a “fundamental right” by the US Supreme court.
Is it a good idea to ‘re-define’ any fundamental right? For me, that sounds like a dangerous precedent to set!
#2. Traditional marriage isn’t broken. Why would we ever consider changing something that has worked for six thousand documented years, to accommodate anyone else’s “need”?
————————–
Let’s create a NEW institution that protects an individuals right to the ‘family’ of his own choosing, and lets be done with it!
.
Seane-Anne just proves how you cannot have “gay” and “conservative” in the same sentence. I wish Dan and the other so called “patriots” would understand that. BTW Dan, nice way to kiss up to Seane. Get thos lips ready boy, there is more butt-kissing to come (GOP conventions, rallies, etc.) And no I’m not a liberal, but sure as hell don’t need to take a piss from turds like Seane-Anne.
Who is trying to pretend that the history of marriage is something that it isn’t? The idea is that today in the 21st century in the United States, we’re a little bit more enlightened than the ancient Greeks and don’t have to do everything the way that they did. We used to have hunt with our bare hands and scavenge for scraps and forage for berries – social change is a good thing.
Particularly when there is absolutely no fallout beyond the who-gives-a-sh*t whining of some religious fundamentalists that think of themselves as believers first and Americans second.
And no I’m not a liberal, but sure as hell don’t need to take a piss from turds like Seane-Anne.
Which is really hilarious, given that you and your fellow gay liberals kiss Obama Party ass constantly for saying and doing the same things.
So what we see here is that you really don’t think Seane-Anna’s views are incompatible or homophobic; you just don’t want someone of the wrong political affiliation, religion, or skin color saying them. If she were black, liberal, or Muslim, you’d be fully supportive.
Particularly when there is absolutely no fallout beyond the who-gives-a-sh*t whining of some religious fundamentalists that think of themselves as believers first and Americans second.
Actually, Levi, yesterday you said that suppressing, ridiculing, and attempting to intimidate people because of their religious beliefs was “sh*tting all over the idea of America”.
And here you are doing it today.
No surprise. Liberals like yourself aren’t capable of intelligent or consistent thought, just talking points. Stupid.
Dennis Prager gets to one of the deepest effects of same sex marriage, the end of gender. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/243922/making-gender-irrelevant-dennis-prager
And this issue of sex difference, EssEm, is perhaps the paramount one in the conversation on marriage — and the one Gay, Inc least wants to consider.
Get a grip NDT you are WAY over head on this one.
“So what we see here is that you really don’t think Seane-Anna’s views are incompatible or homophobic”
No, my problem is that wienies like you butt kiss to people like Seane-Anna.
“you just don’t want someone of the wrong political affiliation, religion, or skin color saying them. If she were black, liberal, or Muslim, you’d be fully supportive.”
Oh please. That is your own pathetic typical gaycon warped view. Stop trying to lecture others when your own “allies” say:
“We believe that the practice of homosexuality tears at the fabric of society, contributes to the breakdown of the family unit, and leads to the spread of dangerous, communicable diseases.”
“Homosexual behavior is contrary to the fundamental, unchanging truths that have beenordained by God, recognized by our country’s founders, and shared by the majority of Texans.”
“Homosexuality must not be presented as an acceptable “alternative” lifestyle in our public education and policy, nor should “family” be redefined to include homosexual “couples.” (Texas GOP 2010)
Please direct me to any other political party that has inserted that on their platforms (even mine, the Libertarian Party) and I will be glad to denounce them like I have with YOUR party.
But lets see what lame excuse the great “patriots” have for this one, besides the usual “gays deserve it” line. Or that gays are pedophiles from NDT or AE.
Please direct me to any other political party that has inserted that on their platforms (even mine, the Libertarian Party) and I will be glad to denounce them like I have with YOUR party.
That is a lie.
Because I presented you two examples above of the Obama Party’s base and its beliefs, including this gem:
“God don’t like men coming to men with lust in their hearts like you should go to a female. If you think that the kingdom of God is going to be filled up with that kind of degenerate crap, you’re out of your damn mind.”
and you didn’t say a damn thing. Indeed, you flat-out REFUSED to denounce those individuals.
So again, what we see here is that you really don’t think Seane-Anna’s views are incompatible or homophobic; you just don’t want someone of the wrong political affiliation, religion, or skin color saying them.
NDM: The point is that historically the Republican Party and Republican-identified public figures have been much more homophobic than their Democratic counterparts. But don’t get me wrong: the Democratic Party still leaves A LOT to be desired.
What I think needs to happen is right-leaning gays need to actively reach out to their straight conservative brothers and sisters to drill the message we are their equals and share their values. Meanwhile, they need to also reach out to other gays and be forthcoming and acknowledge the homophobia that still exists within the party, denounce it, and build support and momentum amongst gays. If the homophobia is ignored or apologized for by gay conservatives, no one will trust them.
As for Seane-Anna, I should note that many Judeo-Christians in fact support same-sex marriage. And being conservative doesn’t preclude one from being gay or supporting same-sex marriage. She clearly feels strongly about this, but has little substance behind her opinions.
*yawn* Homophobia (n) – Term used to decry anything I disagree with.
Perhaps I’m the only one who finds it amusing that our ‘kind’ and ‘tolerant’ lefties are ready to reach out and bash Seena with hatred and bile, then demand that we be ‘tolerant’ and understanding.
The simple fact is this: While Seena Anna and I come from the same Christian beleif system, I do think she overreacts. I do reach out to her, admittedly with occasional tweaking (like pointing out Von Steuben in ‘Gays in the Military’ threads), and point out where she’s wrong.
Perhaps what I find the most amusing is that she is the ‘dark mirror’ of the liberal posters. Right or wrong, she has an image of what this country should be, and wants that nation to become reality. I’ve never seen her post though, that ‘teh gheys’ should be rounded up, or denied representation in court (hello Judge Walker!) or ‘dragged kicking and screaming into the future.’ She just doesn’t want behaviour she deems ‘wrong’ to be legally recognized and held up as acceptable. In this she is exactly the same as the lefties who want to ban hate speech, or demand that I not only tolerate but accept public behaviours I find aberrant.
And JS, I don’t expect you to understand this, but our hosts allowing her to post here isn’t ‘kissing her butt’. This would be a pretty boring read if we all agreed on everything lockstep. By all means they could but then you’d be arguing for your own banning for using terms like ‘pathetic gaycon’ (what the hell is a ‘gaycon’? A gay decepticon?)
I for one like that I can talk civilly with my fellow conservatives on a variety of topics, from DADT (an archaeic tradition, back from when being gay was a security risk) to SSM (which I support a seperate, legislatively created institution, not changing ‘marriage’ and definately not through the courts). My peers here know where I stand, and we can discuss the issues like adults.
Chris,
Historically is a loaded term. I mean historically, Republicans have been the party of freedom, (Lincoln) liberty (reconstruction Republicans) and even acceptance on gay issues (Goldwater). Democrats have been the party of slavery, supression of liberties (FDR) Jim Crow, and against civil rights (Byrd, Al Gore sr.)
Indeed, the stance of most conservatives towards ‘gay rights’ is simply that they have the same rights as every other American, and should have no more, no less.
Interesting that the institution was placed under the protection of Athene rather than, say, Aphrodite or Hera.
Maybe it has to do with Athene as a patroness of weaving, rather than wisdom.
Maybe.
Karl, yes, interesting that. 🙂
Or it could have something to do with Athene being a bridge between the genders.