cheevan's thought

Michael Sandel:

"Is it possible to choose between (to decide) the question of same-sex marriage without taking a stand on a moral and religious controversy over the proper telos of marriage?"

The answer is no.

"If it were only a matter of respect for individual autonomy, if government were truly neutral on the moral worth of voluntary intimate relationships, then it should've adopted a different policy, which is to remove government and the state altogether from according recognition to certain associations, certain kinds of unions rather than others. If government really must be neutral, then, the consistent position is the 3rd position defended by Michael Kinsley, who argues for the abolition of marriage at least as a state function/the disestablishment of religion.

Same-sex marriage can't be justified on the bases of liberal neutrality or non-discrimination or autonomy rights alone, because the question at stake in the public debate, is whether same sex unions have moral worth, whether they are worthy of honor and recognition and whether they fit the purpose of the social institution of marriage.

Kinsley says, you want to be neutral? Then, let churches and other religious institutions offer marriage ceremonies. Let department stores and casinos get into the act if they want to. Let couples celebrate their union in any way they choose and consider themselves married whenever they want. And if three people want to get married, or if one person wants to marry himself or herself, and someone else wants to conduct a ceremony for them and declare them married, let them. If you and your government aren't implicated, what do you care?"

Michael Sandel 指出，從「平權」的理念證立同性婚姻的作法，是不能成立的。

「要決定政府該不該承認同性婚姻，怎可能不先為婚姻之目的、同性戀的道德地位，
　來一場道德辯論呢？」(p. 282)

Michael Sandel 指出，婚姻作為社會制度並非一些人有我有的基本福利，而是對某種生活方式賦予「榮譽與肯定」，是一種推崇和獎勵，
這當然要考慮哪種生活方式包含哪些美德、促進哪些美善，因而值得肯定和獎勵。

Michael Sandel 也指出，若訴諸平權，堅持在價值觀上保持中立，一律平等，那就應接受婚姻的「去建制化」(disestablishment)，這是指「任何形式的婚姻都不承認，由民間機構扮演這個角色。」(p. 283)

因為，「如果所有自願的親密關係，政府對其道德價值都做到真的不置可否，那麼政府就沒有立場限制重婚，一夫多妻或一妻多夫也都可以合法化了。」(p. 286)

若棄守一夫一妻的婚姻，究竟什麼原則，可以讓我們一方面接納同性婚姻，但又不會導致「三人婚姻、多元婚姻、近親婚、人獸婚等，原則上也可以被接納」的結論呢？