Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Champions of "Normal" Can Be Downright Freakish

Get a load of this article in the Weekly Standard by Sam Schulmann.  Here's a sample:

This most profound aspect of marriage–protecting and controlling the sexuality of the child-bearing sex–is its only true reason for being, and it has no equivalent in same-sex marriage.

And here's something to offend heterosexuals:

Few men would ever bother to enter into a romantic heterosexual marriage–much less three, as I have done–were it not for the iron grip of necessity that falls upon us when we are unwise enough to fall in love with a woman other than our mom.
 Is it just me, or has anyone else noted the weirdly abstract quality of so much anti-gay intellectual argument?  This essay is a particularly notable example.

Hat tip to Atrios.

Check out Toujourdan's post about gay life in Saudi Arabia.  It reads like a religious right wet dream, especially the police for "The Promotion of Virtue and The Prevention of Vice."


motheramelia said...

What century does this man live in? The rules of kinship have led to so much violence in the world that I'm blown away (pun intended) by Sam Schulman's article. What a lot of hogwash.

Göran Koch-Swahne said...

Hogwash it is.

David G. said...


Do you know the definition?

Does anybody?!?