Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D.

Peg and I disagree about whether two men or two women should be allowed to marry. (I'm speaking of legal marriage, which is essentially a bundle of legal rights and responsibilities. Gay and lesbian couples have always been able to enter into moral or spiritual marriages.) Here is Peg's latest post on the topic. I think Peg and I have different understandings (or theories) of the purpose of marriage. It's not about friendship; it's about children. No conservative can support homosexual "marriage," for it is a radical departure from marriage as traditionally understood. A conservative, by definition, wants to move slowly and carefully where traditional ways of life are concerned. I see no harm, for example, in conferring certain rights on homosexual couples, such as the right to make medical decisions for incompetent partners, provided these rights are available to unmarried heterosexual couples. These things can be done without upsetting traditional marriage. By the way, Peg should consider the possibility that Barack Obama is sincere in his opposition to homosexual "marriage." We know that the man is cynical and calculating, and we know that he is wrong on many matters, but perhaps he is both sincere and correct on this issue.