Join the Conversation


  1. So, if an elderly man and woman – both having lost their spouses – share time together, date and decide to get married, but because of advanced years and physical limitations they are conjugally limited, we’re to say their marriage is a fraud?

    My wife and I have no children but have been married for over 20 years. Our deficiency in procreating should be seen as grounds to deny the validity of our marriage?

      1. The National Review article addresses these points? I didn’t read the entire paper but I read the National Review article and took the thrust of the NR article to be that the authors – in their words – “argue that as a moral reality, marriage is the union of a man and a woman who make a permanent and exclusive commitment to each other of the type that is naturally fulfilled by bearing and rearing children together, and renewed by acts that constitute the behavioral part of the process of reproduction.”

        1. The National Review article is a brief statement. Follow the link to the PDF of the full paper in my comment above, and they take account of the circumstance you’re in and the one you mention in your first comment.

          Good to hear from you!


  2. I thought Obama’s comment that a main reason he is for gay marriage is because his girls couldn’t understand why some of their friends’ parents couldn’t be married. Since when do we make decisions based on what our children can understand? It would be difficult to even make little children if adults limited their activities to what children can understand.

    I appreciate how your post says the key is to defining marriage. Not surprisingly, this is the very thing that the pro gay marriage side will not engage. They will probably continue to ignore the question. This seems to be an extremely dangerous moment for our country. God help us indeed.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *