The next objection to maintaining traditional marriage is the argument from contracts.  This one seems pretty straight forward to me and comes down once again to what the view of marriage ought to be.  Perhaps this response is valuable for just that reason.  I believe the argument can be summarized like this:

P1:  Marriage is a contract like many other contracts
P2:  Same-sex marriage would also be a contract
C1:  A same-sex marriage contract should be legally allowed

The response to this argument is that the nature of the marriage contract is fundamentally different from any other contract.  The marriage contract includes expectations such as child support, and other considerations rising from procreative possibilities.  No other relationship has this, and it is fundamental to the traditional view of marriage.  A marriage ‘contract’ ought to be fundamentally different from what might be called a civil union ‘contract’ for example.

Continue reading at the original source →