Everybody look what’s going down
Lenin would know exactly what it’s all about. I’m shocked that John “if it’s less than 500 years old, it has no value” Weidner would be making a Beatles reference. Also: why would he be making this Beatles reference?
It seems to undercut his point just a bit…
Since John doesn’t seem to understand the difference between Marriage with 2 adults, and:
1) Marriage with 1 adult and 1 infant
2) Marriage with 1 adult and 2 other adults.
3) Marriage with 1 adult human and 1 dog (of undetermined age)
and
4) Marriage with 1 adult human and 1 Robot (with great attractiveness)
Let me spell it out for him: Infants, dogs, and Robots can’t consent to marriage. Nor, indeed, anything else. As for polygamous relationships: most of the time, they’re relationships based on coercion and quite frankly involve children and adults. Show me 3 adults who all wish to marry one another and we’ll have a whole separate conversation..
So in my world, marriage must be based on two things: 1) love 2) the wiliness of people capable of giving consent to give consent. Against this, John Weidner presents a fear of “communism”, fear of “change”, and fear of “ickiness” (the last is inferred).
My principles tell me that lines should be drawn as broadly and as widely as possible, to let all people within the sweet embrace of society. What possible defense does John have for limiting the rights of individuals to participate in society?
Related posts:
Discussion Area - Leave a Comment