Wednesday, October 23, 2013

A note to my fellow religious extremists

Get this through your skull: Same-sex "marriage" has NOTHING to do with the celebration of sodomy or mutual masturbation. At all. The redefinition of marriage required to accommodate same-sex couples does NOT entail a celebration of particular sexual acts. Remember, religious extremists, the re-definition of marriage is an inherently gnostic project and because gnosticism is indifference to the corporeal world, a gnostic conception of marriage cannot be tied to any particular bodily act or acts. What constitutes gnostic "marriage" is not the marital act (in the traditional, bigoted sense of coitus) but some really vague notion of intimacy, and the "married" couple now is free to do anything to achieve that intimacy. They could choose coitus or sodomy or mutual masturbation, true, but it need not be an orgasmic act. It could be cuddling, holding hands, playing gin rummy, or a really deep conversation about the spiritual dimensions of Joseph Beuys' Installations. In another words, the consummation of a gnostic "marriage" happens when this intimacy, whatever it may be, is achieved and not when a particular bodily act is performed. Therefore, the suggestion that there is a necessary connection between same-sex "marriage" and sodomy is simply false.

I should make one very important qualification. The couple is free to express their intimacy in any way that is legal. Obviously, the preferred way of a necrophiliac couple to achieve their intimacy is legally prohibited. We're gnostic, true, but not quite THAT gnostic. Not yet, anyway.

Also, since intimacy is what is crucial to a marriage and NOT the particular act done to achieve it, there can only be a marital privilege to intimacy and not to any particular bodily act. If the state wants to ban coitus for various health reasons, it can do so without trampling upon marital rights. If married couples object, the courts can just say that marital intimacy does not depend on any particular bodily act. This means, of course, that the legal prohibition of sodomy is perfectly compatible with the legal recognition of same-sex "marriage". And, no, I am NOT saying that either coitus or sodomy will be outlawed. Please, do not misunderstand my point. I am simply saying that certain definable bodily acts cannot be counted among the rights in the new, gnostic conception of "marriage".

No comments: