RE: Shulman... OMG! First, what a poorly, poorly written essay. It took over 600 words to even get around to the point. It is painfully, painfully bad. Give the man an "F" for composition. THEN, Good GOD....
Quote
Virginity until marriage, arranged marriages, the special status of the sexuality of one partner but not the other (and her protection from the other sex)--these motivating forces for marriage do not apply to same-sex lovers.
Is he a Cardinal or something? No, wait, three failed marriages... although, maybe still celibate... Or, at least we can hope...
Quote
Second, kinship modifies marriage by imposing a set of rules that determines not only whom one may marry (someone from the right clan or family, of the right age, with proper abilities, wealth, or an adjoining vineyard), but, more important, whom one may not marry.
Did he crib this from 5th Century monk?
Quote
the illicit or licit nature of heterosexual copulation is transmitted to the child, who is deemed legitimate or illegitimate based on the metaphysical category of its parents' coition.
This is downright barbaric... and this is supposed to be an essay opposing same-sex marriage? This is a collation of cretinous pseudointellectual blather of the highest order. Is it supposed to be satire? If so it even fails at that... He has to be paid by the word, or why bother. Give the man an "F" for content, context, relevance and order as well. This is, truly, one of the worst essays I have had the misfortune to have ever read. It is beyond nonsensical, way past crude, completely unpersuasive, and both boorish and ephemeral. What a complete buffoon. Thanks for posting the link!

Last edited by NW Ponderer; 06/02/09 11:29 PM.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich