Sam Harris

Salt Creek - 01 December 2007 04:07 PM

We can indeed control what we do, to some extent, but cannot control what we desire. The distortion of a relationship from being tempted by another is enough to send many marriages into a tailspin. They recover mainly through dogged determination, if they recover at all. All this rather than by “loving” and “cherishing” and “honoring”, which I term “woolly abstractions”.

I, for one, do not really see much difference, ownership-wise, between trying to control another’s actions and trying to control their thoughts. This is precisely analogous to the problem religions have with homosexuality. Distortion of affect.

I agree.

Salt Creek - 01 December 2007 04:07 PM

Placing some implied limits on the imagined degree of perfectibility of mankind would, I think be one place to start.

While you have an excellent point, I was criticizing the opposite extreme embodied by Western religious doctrines, the people-must-be-controlled-for-their-own-good mentality. Surely there’s a middle ground.

“Still, there should be a way for society to value the protections that marriage offers for offspring without using shame.”

It’s called Child Support.

“Why should there be any privileges at all to the marriage institution in relation to the care of children?”

There probably shouldn’t, and there probably aren’t.

“Child carers, whether or not they are married, or the numbers of them, should be recognized for the crucial societal function they have “burdened” themselves with.”

No argument there. There was a time I agreed with the conservative family value agenda, but that is a dream. The reality is far uglier.

I once saw an episode of COPS—they were following a female cop. One of her calls was a domestic violence thing, with drugs involved. There was a baby, maybe a year old. She had to take the baby “downtown”. The cameras followed the cop and baby inside the “facility”, and it was deplorable. Caretakers hardened like triage nurses, I guess. Some old gal pointed to an empty crib and kept doing what she had been doing. The female cop goes out to her car, stresses for a moment, then goes back inside and asks the old gal if the baby is going to be OK there for the night? The old gal says flatly “he’ll be fine, Honey.” The cop goes back to her car, gets in and shuts the door, and starts crying. So did I.

I used to think it was unfair for “alternate lifestyle” parents to have a shot at adoption, when there were “normal, deserving” couples who wanted to adopt. But it ain’t that way. There are a lot of unwanted kids around, and I highly respect those willing to help them, especially make a career of it.

mcalpine - 01 December 2007 07:22 PM

“Why should there be any privileges at all to the marriage institution in relation to the care of children?”

There probably shouldn’t, and there probably aren’t.

“Child carers, whether or not they are married, or the numbers of them, should be recognized for the crucial societal function they have “burdened” themselves with.”

No argument there. There was a time I agreed with the conservative family value agenda, but that is a dream. The reality is far uglier.

I once saw an episode of COPS—they were following a female cop. One of her calls was a domestic violence thing, with drugs involved. There was a baby, maybe a year old. She had to take the baby “downtown”. The cameras followed the cop and baby inside the “facility”, and it was deplorable. Caretakers hardened like triage nurses, I guess. Some old gal pointed to an empty crib and kept doing what she had been doing. The female cop goes out to her car, stresses for a moment, then goes back inside and asks the old gal if the baby is going to be OK there for the night? The old gal says flatly “he’ll be fine, Honey.” The cop goes back to her car, gets in and shuts the door, and starts crying. So did I.

I used to think it was unfair for “alternate lifestyle” parents to have a shot at adoption, when there were “normal, deserving” couples who wanted to adopt. But it ain’t that way. There are a lot of unwanted kids around, and I highly respect those willing to help them, especially make a career of it.

I would like to say that I don’t, per se, regard a public celebration of love and spoken oaths of commitment to the other’s happinbess as a vile, abnormal thing.
Instead, I think it is deeply charming.
Nor do I think that marriage in any way reduces the chances for making a good environment for children to grow up in.