That view wouldn’t make gender immutable, though. Two men raising a child are still two men, one doesn’t just beome a woman by ‘wishing it’.

Somewhat analogous, it’s generally better for kids to be raised by their biological parents. Saying that adoptive parents are good, though, doesn’t mean that you’re asserting biology is immutable.

Anyway, this really has no relationship to SSM. Why are you less obligated to marry the woman you have children with because the two guys at the end of the block may have a marriage license from the state rather than a civil union license?

Men and women are interchangeable – that is, having a second mommy is just as good as having a daddy – but you’re not allowed to ask why men need to marry men, specifically.

So gender is selectively immutable.

JB,

I’m trying not to let gut reactions be the deciding criteria. We have two concepts that have been brought up: Christian orthodoxy and heresy. I think it is important to define both. I would appreciate it if someone could define Christian orthodoxy. I was raised Catholic, and while there are some things that are definitively “Catholic orthodoxy” and some things that are definitively not, they are nevertheless gray areas. But there are things that are Catholic orthodoxy that are definitely not Christian orthodoxy. Without a definition Christian orthodoxy, I think it is difficult to distinguish it from heresy, but it seems to me that there is such a diversity of interpretations of Christian doctrine that in order for something to be considered heresy—and I mean Christian heresy—it must be very fundamental. And yet I don’t think there is universal agreement within Christianity on any one of the earliest Christian creeds.

Certainly the overwhelming majority of Christian denominations would not endorse same-sex marriage, and most would consider homosexuality “against nature” and sinful. But I don’t necessarily see opposition to same-sex marriage as “Christian orthodoxy.” Some major Christian denominations are taking thoughtful second looks at homosexuality, and I don’t think it is helpful while that is ongoing to talk of “Christian orthodoxy” and especially not of heresy.

I would be interested to hear your definition or the definition of others of “Christian orthodoxy.” From the Catholic viewpoint nothing could be clearer than the indissolubility of marriage, and Catholics would say the Bible is very clear on that matter. But I don’t think (unless perhaps you are Catholic) that you would maintain Christian orthodoxy absolutely prohibited divorce and remarriage.

Seriously, David, do you really believe that orthodox Christian teaching is in favor of same-sex marriage, or are you just amusing yourself by stirring up the water a little?

Would you agree with me on this one? Surveys of women who have abortions show that 28% of women who have abortions identify themselves as Catholics. This is slightly higher than their percentage in the population. I have had people argue that no truly Catholic woman would have an abortion, so these women may call themselves Catholics, but they aren’t Catholics. Therefore, the percentage of Catholic women in the United States who have abortions is zero. One might might make the same argument about Christians in general. Sixty-five percent of women who obtain abortions are Christian (Catholic or Protestant), but no true Christian woman would have an abortion, so Christians in the United States don’t have abortions.

Would you also agree that to say a Christian departs from “Christian orthodoxy” is not necessarily to say he or she is a “heretic”? Heresy to me must entail a very fundamental disagreement with all or almost all other Christians, probably about something in one of the early creeds. If you do not believe in the Resurrection of Jesus in some form or another, you are a heretic. However, if you are in a small minority that believes all gambling and dancing are sinful, and the majority of Christians believe otherwise, you are not a heretic.

I’m not necessarily defending every instance of identifying something as the sine qua non of orthodox Christianity that someone might proffer. I’m just saying that I get really irritated whenever someone cries “no true Scotsman” whenever people suggest that there’s a definition for the word Christian, and some people or churches don’t meet it. You might disagree that the boundary marker someone is drawing is an appropriate one, but that doesn’t make it the “no true Scotsman” fallacy.

pentamom,

Indeed there are people who hold the idea of ‘social construction’ as useful, although to say gender is socially constructed usually doesn’t mean what it sounds like it means. It doesn’t mean there’s no difference between the sexes, it means differences that are not biological are ‘socially created’.

But if in terms of this conversation we talk about gender being non-immutable then the ‘sex discrimination’ argument against banning SSM falls. If gender is mutable then gender based discrimination is problematic….after all you can just change your gender! What’s being missed, ironically, is that because gender is not mutable that SSM shouldn’t be banned.

If someone wants to go argue with postmodernists, they should go do so. I get irked, though, when people argue with cartoon post-modernists. If someone who really follows social construction theory comes here and presents it, argue with him all you want.

pentamom,

I agree it doesn’t. But who is going to define what it means to be “outside the bounds of Christian orthodoxy”? And even if a person or a denomination is “outside the bounds of Christian orthodoxy,” does that mean they are “heretical”? It seems to me to call Christians heretics they must hold a view that is outside the core definition of Christianity as set out by the major Christian creeds. Merely departing from the majority does not make a Christian sect heretical, or even necessarily outside the bounds of orthodoxy.

here’s an imaginary link to an imaginary page of Google results linking to imaginary pages discussing the concept of gender as a social construction — not all negatively.

http://www.google.com/search?q=gender+as+social+construction+definition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&client=firefox-a&rlz=1R1GGGL_en___US345