Maggie Gallagher on the "natural life-cycle of marriage"
Maggie Gallagher has been writing at the Volokh Conspiracy in opposition to same-sex marriage. Her arguments are full of unsubstantiated statements and logical holes (earlier today she stated in passing, as if it were common knowledge, that the Roman Empire fell because of "sexual disorganization"), but this one in particular is especially bizarre:
[Trying to rebut the argument that] well, we have some nonprocreating couples in the mix. Why would adding SS couples change anything? Two points: SS couples are being added to the mix precisely in order to assure that society views them as “no different” than other couples. This intrinsically means (if the effort is successful) downgrading if not eliminating the social significance of generativity (procreation and family structure). The second truth is that both older couples and childless couples are part of the natural life-cycle of marriage. Their presence in the mix doesn’t signal anything in particular at all.Right. Because childless couples who are biologically incapable of having children magically develop fertility through the "natural life-cycle of marriage". And, of course, postmenopausal women can only get married if they previously had children earlier in the "natural life-cycle of marriage."