[lbo-talk] Gay marriage

[John Thornton]

Michael Pollak wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Nov 2008, John Thornton wrote:
>
>> No one has yet to explain to me why marriage today is such a horrible 
>> institution.
>
> Well you know the answer to that, John.  The same connection to 
> history going back to Urshlim that gays like, feminists loathe.  For 
> gays it's the magic of being part of a history from which they've 
> always been excluded. For women, the word represents exactly the 
> historical institution in which they've long been imprisoned, and as a 
> global category of people, still largely are.
>
> Again the word has a heft independent of the rights.  No one argues 
> you don't need family law.  And no one argues you can't modify 
> marriage so it means something very different.  But many feminists I 
> know would be more than happy with laws which signified the liberatory 
> intention to make a break with this feudal-and-worse past by burying 
> the term.
>
> Michael 

But my question is what today, right now, makes marriage a bad 
institution in a legal way?
Of course I know the historical baggage but I cannot think of a better 
way to legally accomplish what marriage does today.
Since the terms mean has already been modified into something vastly 
different than it was 100 years ago I don't see the need to bury it.
I'd be willing to wager that a great many people today do not really 
know the historic baggage the word carries.
People claim it's a tradition without really knowing what that tradition 
consisted of before their parents or grandparents time.

John Thornton