Monandry

My apologies to those who want something more challenging, but here's a classic slippery slope from the Vatican:

VATICAN CITY — The Vatican is digging in after gay marriage initiatives scored big wins this week in the U.S. and Europe, vowing to never stop insisting that marriage can only be between a man and a woman.

In a front-page article in Saturday's Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, the Holy See sought to frame itself as the lone voice of courage in opposing initiatives to give same-sex couples legal recognition. In a separate Vatican Radio editorial, the pope's spokesman asked sarcastically why gay marriage proponents don't now push for legal recognition for polygamous couples as well.

I apologize for the lack of a direct quote and link, but the Osservatore Romano site does not have the article and when you search for the term "gay" nothing appears.  Curious.  Anyway, perhaps the Pope's spokesperson will remember that the slope leading to polygamy and polyandry hasn't already been traversed in the opposite direction.  Those things already exist, in other words, and it was straight marriage that led to them.

Gay marriage, being the opposite of straight marriage, will lead therefore ipso fatso apodictically to the opposite of the slope leading to polyandry and polygamy: monandry or monogamy.  That's the way logic works.

5 thoughts on “Monandry”

  1. It's not surprising that you had difficulty finding it; the article is obviously muddled– that can be seen at once from the conflation of L'Osservatore Romano with the 'Holy See', and the vague referring of everything to 'the Vatican', both of which are tell-tale signs of a reporter not doing his or her homework. (The mistaken attributing of the editorial to Saturday's paper is another, although much more subtle, sign: L'O R publishes in the afternoon and, by a custom dating to the 1860s, dates the paper for the next day,  so the paper with Saturday's date is always Friday's paper, not Saturday's; any reporter with any serious experience covering the Vatican and the Holy See would know this.)
     
    In any case, the "papal spokesman" was Federico Lombardi, and the editorial was for <a href="http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2012/11/10/lombardi_editorial:_church_will_not_give_up_its_defence_of_marriage/en1-637516">Vatican Radio</a>, not L'Osservatore Romano, and while he does happen to be the papal spokesman, he was not speaking as such but as editor of Vatican Radio. (Lucetta Scaraffi's editorial is on <a href="http://www.osservatoreromano.va/portal/dt?JSPTabContainer.setSelected=JSPTabContainer%2FDetail&last=false=&path=/news/editoriali/2012/259q12-Scaraffia–Il-coraggio-di-un-pensiero-alter.html&title=Il coraggio  di un pensiero alternativo&locale=it">the Italian version of the website</a>; the English edition of L'O R comes out later in the week.)

  2. I eagerly await Fr. Lombardi's scathing press release condemning the Bible for its failure to denounce the polygamous marriages of the prophets Lamech, Abraham, Jacob, Esau, Gideon, Saul, David, Solomon, Rehoboam, Elkanah, Ashur, Abijah, and Jehoiada.

  3. Thanks for the links Brandon.  I was looking for the article in the Osservatore Romano, whose website kind of stinks, and gets updated like once a week I think.  One of the other versions of this article was slightly clearer.

  4. The Catholic Church already requires polygamy.  Every Catholic nun is married to Jesus Christ.  Not only does the Catholic Church require polygamy, but they worship the husband who practices polygamy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>