fbpx

My prediction about the Princeton Professors…

Yesterday, I predicted that the debate between two Princeton professors would not broach what I consider to be the crucial questions on the marriage issue.

Princeton Professors duke it out over the definition of marriage.
Princeton Professors duke it out over the definition of marriage.

The opening salvo by Professor Emeritus James Doig seemed more concerned with catching Professor Robert George in some inconsistency than in really exploring what the redefinition of marriage might ultimately mean.

In my reaction to his article, I posed these question. I consider them the most crucial issues.

How will redefining marriage redefine parenthood? Are we happy with that redefinition? And do we really want to change the relationship between the State and the citizen in the way that this redefinition really entails?

And I predicted that the week-long exchange between the Princeton Professors would not address these issues.

Today’s response by Professor Robert George has many interesting arguments and ideas. But he does not remotely answer these questions.

Stay tuned. Maybe Professor Doig will take them up tomorrow.

I’m not holding my breath.

No one is doing what the Ruth Institute is doing: inspiring the Survivors of the Sexual Revolution to to recover from their negative experiences and share their stories with the young. Join us here.

 

share with your friends:

Facebook
Twitter
YouTube

Want to dig in? Here’s more

Queer Politics Means More Sexual State

Queer identity politics seems to have almost a contempt for the American way of settling disputes and resolving issues. The problem compounds when bureaucrats adopt the ideology of queer identity politics.

Read More