Beards and Gay Marriage

[PRmerger]

If I were to give you examples would it change the fact that adultery is wrong from religious, trust, Buddhist and natural law perspectives?

Isn’t it enough that we all agree on the wrongness of adultery. Why attempt to change it into a scientific inquiry?

You have made my point for me.

You are exactly right: there is a principle at work here–some things are wrong, objectively, because they violate a principle. Even if no harm can be seen to a particular individual.

Now, just apply the above to gay “marriage”.

 

[frobert]

You have made my point for me.
You are exactly right: there is a principle at work here–some things are wrong, objectively, because they violate a principle. Even if no harm can be seen to a particular individual.

Now, just apply the above to gay “marriage”.

Nice comeback. My understanding of the wrongness of adultery is based on the psychology of marital trust and relationships. I was simply pointing out the various paths to our agreement. I believe you understood that.

For a religious perspective I can refer you to the religious perspective of the UCC on covenant marriage which is based on similar but not identical principals as the Catholic perspective. If you wish to discuss the validity of those principals you would do better with someone competent in the underlying metaphysics. I am competent in area of psycho-dynamics and will discuss them with you if you want.

Correct me if I am mistaken but wasn’t the original post on the equivalence of SSM and incest? Would you like to discuss more about that?

 

[Trueca]

there are no independent surveys of which I am aware that show this (please, please don’t mention that buffoon Mark Regenerus).

However, there are a few, albeit with small samples, that show the opposite. And there is one recent survey, authored this year, by an Australian that has close to 500 families included. This is a parent-reported survey but was compared, naturally, to other parent reported findings of familes with heterosexual parents. The conclusion?

Sorry for disagreeing on us Catholics relying on information taken from catholic sources and not from the homosexual lobby. They always had small elf-volunteer sample "The available data, which are drawn primarily from small convenience samples, are insufficient to support a strong generalizable claim either way. Such a statement would not be grounded in science.”
A large representative sample is supplied in a second new study, conducted by a University of Texas–Austin sociologist The New Family Structures Study (NFSS), under the direction of Dr. Mark Regnerus, provides the most representative picture to date of young adults whose parents had same-sex relationships.

Now they came up with the Australian “bigger” sample- "The the data was gathered by recruiting parents in same-sex households through homosexual news media… and compare the results from such an unusual sample with that of a population-based sample of everyone else is just suspect science. And I may be putting that too mildly.”

 

[stewstew03]

That’s not necessarily correct. Slavery made a lot of societies prosperous. Did they have (and should they have had) an interest in protecting what was considered normal?

You didn’t actually refute the premise, you just introduced a parallel. States that sponsor slavery have an interest in protecting slavery because, as you said, those states prosper from slave labor.

Indeed they do. But I hope you’re not suggesting that therefore all other environments are *therefore *unsuitable. That would not necessarily follow.

Correct, I’m not suggesting that all other environments are unsuitable. But we know that children who grow up without a mom or without a dad do not fair as well, generally speaking, when compared to children who grow up with a mom or dad. There’s scant evidence with regard to children raised by SSM couples.

From the state’s perspective, a stable family unit (Mother/Father/Children) is a norm worth protecting – and promoting – because stable families foster growth and prosperity.

That’s not necessarily correct.

What’s not necessarily correct? That the state doesn’t have an interest in protecting / promoting stable families?

A stable family unit does not have to consist of a mother, father and children

Agreed - see above

and the state in any case has no business in making any decision on what constitutes the ideal family unit.

Really? Then by extension, you could just as easily argue “the state has no business redefining marriage.”

China actually enforces what it considers it to be to ‘foster growth and prosperity’. Do you agree with their perspective?

Are you referring to the one child policy? It’s not clear. In any event, China is a good example of a state enforcing certain rules/policies that it believes fosters growth/prosperity – however misguided the state might be.

But all states do this. My argument – or, rather, the argument from this side of the debate – is that there is absolutely no need for the state to redefine marriage, and doing so opens up Pandora’s box.

As opposed to a simple legal agreement or as simply a cooperative for producing offspring? I don’t know about you, but my marriage can definately be described as an emotional connection between two people and I can guarantee that the relationship between parents and children is not devalued in any way whatsoever.

Okay. But if marriage is simply an emotional connection, how does that serve the state’s interest? Do I need the state to recognize the connection I have with my friends?

You haven’t actually refuted the basic argument from the traditional perspective – namely, that state has an interest in protecting and promoting the norm of mother/father/child. All you’ve said is “Not true – take a look at these red herrings (slavery and China).”

What is the state’s interest in promoting/recognizing an emotional bond between two people?

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Thank you for the interesting information. I believe St Paul studied Plato and that many of his ideas where influenced by Plato.

We have no way of knowing whether St. Paul read Plato. Plato is never mentioned by Paul.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Plato’s thinking has influenced some of the brightest minds of psychology such as Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung.

Peace

I can see the influence on Jung. How did he influence Freud?

 

[stewstew03]

Regenerus’ study was a farce (it had a grand total of two families where the family could be described as gay. Count them…two!).

But if you know of any problems associated with the Australian one that wasn’t admitted to in the study itself, then please let me know. I don’t want to put knowingly post incorrect information.

The Regnerus study is only a farce if you try to extend its conclusions too far. He essentially found that children raised by their biological parents - biological mom and biological dad - fare better than children not raised under these circumstances. Nobody seriously disputes his methodology, which included a large, random, and nationally representative sample. As you said, his sample included only two SSM families where the child was raised from birth to 18 years of age. HOWEVER, his sample also included 175 children who were raised by their lesbian mother, and 73 children who were raised by their gay father.

We could probably go back and forth about overgeneralizing the results of the Regnerus Study. But hopefully you will not ignore the mountain of data in support of his conclusion:

Children raised by their biological parents are better off than those raised in alternative settings – including single parent households, stepparent households, and cohabiting couples. Or, as sociologists Sara McLanahan (Princeton) and Gary Sandefur (Wisconsin) put it, based on 4 longitudinal studies of nationally representative samples including 20,000 subjects, “children who grow up in a household with only one biological parent are worse off, on average, than children who grow up in a household with both of their biological parents . . . regardless of whether the resident parent remarries.”

So, as I said in a previous post, the state has a very strong interest in reinforcing marital norms (Mother/Father/Child).

 

[stewstew03]

Follow up…

And for those interested in actually reading the Regnerus study, here is the link: markregnerus.com/uploads/4/0/6/5/4065759/regnerus_july_2012_ssr.pdf

 

[frobert]

We have no way of knowing whether St. Paul read Plato. Plato is never mentioned by Paul.

The literature is replete with references that Paul was influenced by Plato. Here is one such reference there are many others.

"Paul, who seems to have studied all of Plato’s works, used these in his gospels, issued as his own revelations about God. As a result, many of the subjects Plato used in his discourses have become tenets of the Christian church. "

worldandi.com/newhome/public/2004/april/mtpub2.asp

I can see the influence on Jung. How did he influence Freud?

Simalaly with Freud and Plato

“the striking similarities between Freud’s theory of the id, ego, and superego and Plato’s division of the soul into the appetitive, rational, and spirited.”

electrummagazine.com/2013/05/dreams-and-the-psyche-through-an-ancient-lens/

When reading the biographies of the early psychoanalysts you can not help to recognize the similarities to major philosophers that appear in their work and come to believe that they were influenced by the philosophers. I believe it was Isaac Newton who said we “stand on the shoulders of giants.”

None-the-less, good questions. They show that you are interested in expanding your horizons.

 

[frobert]

Follow up…

And for those interested in actually reading the Regnerus study, here is the link: markregnerus.com/uploads/4/0/6/5/4065759/regnerus_july_2012_ssr.pdf

A follow-up on a reviewer of the the Regnerus study: Paul Amato President Elect of the National Council on Family Relations and a Distinguished Professor at Penn State University.

Paul Amato on reviewing Regnerus

Thoughts on the Mark Regnerus (2012) study, by Paul Amato

“One year has passed since Mark Regnerus (2012) published a highly controversial article on the children of parents who have same-sex relationships.”

“…the political left could have benefitted from a strategic appropriation of the findings. The study involved a national sample of young adults with an LGBT parent. As the study noted, few of these young adults spent long periods of time in households with two parents of the same sex. Instead, most were born into heterosexual families that later broke up, presumably when one parent came out as gay or lesbian. Many of these youth went on to experience a variety of other family structures before reaching adulthood.”

Read more of Paul Amoto’s follow-up here.

I don’t have a left wing or right wing bias. I believe both sides are out of control.

From the same article here is Paul Amoto:

“In conclusion, the political left discredited the Regnerus study without fully considering its findings, and the political right used the study disingenuously to further their political goals. Few people have focused thoughtfully on what the data actually show and what we can learn from the study. The controversy over the Regnerus study provides a sobering illustration of what can go wrong when ideology distorts social research.”

 

[Charlemagne_III]

The literature is replete with references that Paul was influenced by Plato. Here is one such reference there are many others.

"Paul, who seems to have studied all of Plato’s works, used these in his gospels, issued as his own revelations about God. As a result, many of the subjects Plato used in his discourses have become tenets of the Christian church. "
​

I don’t accept this and most theologians don’t either. You have failed to produce one reference by Paul to Plato. F.F. Powell’s essay, which you cited, is only one of many anti-Pauline propaganda mills that try to make out Paul to be among the earliest of the heretics because he taught something supposedly disagreeable to the anti-Paulinists (many of whom I daresay hate Paul because he regularly attacks the sin of sodomy).

I’d like you to name me one tenet of the Catholic Church that comes from Plato rather than Paul, Christ, or Moses.​

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I don’t accept this and most theologians don’t either. You have failed to produce one reference by Paul to Plato.

In the Phaedrus, Plato uses the phrase “through a glass darkly”, a phrase repeated in 1 Cor 13. The Greek isn’t identical, but the contexts are very similar, and expression is at the very least quite evocative of Plato. (As is the entirety of the first four chapters of 2 Cor.)

 

[Charlemagne_III]

“the striking similarities between Freud’s theory of the id, ego, and superego and Plato’s division of the soul into the appetitive, rational, and spirited.”
​

I seriously doubt that Freud developed Ego, Id, and Superego after reading Plato. That is the sort of thesis you would get from a psychology student working on his Master’s.

It would be just as plausible that he got all three ideas from reading Alexander Pope’s “Essay on Man.”

Do you have a book or paper that substantively develops the Plato-Freud influence?

I’m interested but skeptical. ​

 

[Charlemagne_III]

In the Phaedrus, Plato uses the phrase “through a glass darkly”, a phrase repeated in 1 Cor 13. The Greek isn’t identical, but the contexts are very similar, and expression is at the very least quite evocative of Plato. (As is the entirety of the first four chapters of 2 Cor.)

Again, this is one of those “airy” connections that don’t sit well with me, especially in light of the fact that similar metaphors commonly appear in disparate culture without having necessarily been transported from one to the other.

Image of deities sporting wings (a nearly universal metaphor), for example, or hurling thunderbolts.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Again, this is one of those “airy” connections that don’t sit well with me, especially in light of the fact that similar metaphors commonly appear in disparate culture without having necessarily been transported from one to the other.

Show me another culture where the notion of “through a glass darkly” appears. Until you do that, you are making a circular argument.

(Also, Paul’s culture was Plato’s culture. Paul was a Roman citizen, and Plato centrally figured in Roman education.)

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I seriously doubt that Freud developed Ego, Id, and Superego after reading Plato. That is the sort of thesis you would get from a psychology student working on his Master’s.

It would be just as plausible that he got all three ideas from reading Alexander Pope’s “Essay on Man.”

Do you have a book or paper that substantively develops the Plato-Freud influence?

I’m interested but skeptical.

Cambridge Companion to Plato’s Republic, Giovanni Ferrari, p. 176.

Essays on Plato’s Psychology, Ellen Wagner, p.2-3

Freud, Jonathan Lear, p.165-167

C.K. Kahn, Plato’s Theory of Desire, The Review of metaphysics, 1987

I assure you Drs. Ferrari, Wagner, Lear, and Kahn are no pimply undergraduates. Rather, they are among the best scholars of philosophical history that I know.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Cambridge Companion to Plato’s Republic, Giovanni Ferrari, p. 176.

Essays on Plato’s Psychology, Ellen Wagner, p.2-3

Freud, Jonathan Lear, p.165-167

C.K. Kahn, Plato’s Theory of Desire, The Review of metaphysics, 1987

I assure you Drs. Ferrari, Wagner, Lear, and Kahn are no pimply undergraduates. Rather, they are among the best scholars of philosophical history that I know.

Since I don’t have access to those sources, and you apparently do, would it be possible to quote briefly from just one of them (the best one) to make the point that Freud is indebted to Plato for some of his discoveries?

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Show me another culture where the notion of “through a glass darkly” appears. Until you do that, you are making a circular argument.

(Also, Paul’s culture was Plato’s culture. Paul was a Roman citizen, and Plato centrally figured in Roman education.)

It does not follow that Paul adopted Platonic notions in developing his theology.

Until you can show me where he does, you are not even making a circular argument.

“Through a glass darkly” doesn’t count as a theological notion. It is a nice metaphor and nothing more.

It does not follow that because Paul had Roman citizenship he read Plato. Not anymore than it follows that an American citizen is educated in the Constitution. It would be nice to think that all college graduates know the Constitution, but it would be a dream only.

Paul did not earn his spurs as our first great theologian by reading Plato. All he needed was to be called by Christ and informed by the apostles. Had Plato never lived, it is difficult for me to understand why Paul would have developed a different theology than the one he did.

Show me how Paul tempered the teachings of Jesus by mixing them with the musings of Plato.

 

[Peter_Plato]

Show me another culture where the notion of “through a glass darkly” appears. Until you do that, you are making a circular argument.

(Also, Paul’s culture was Plato’s culture. Paul was a Roman citizen, and Plato centrally figured in Roman education.)

The phrase may have had more general Greek cultural origins from which It came to Paul and, thus, not from Plato, in particular.

In other words, it may not be the case that the phrase was picked up by Paul from Plato, but that both Plato and Paul picked up a commonly used phrase from wider Greek cultural influences.

As to the influence of Plato on Christian doctrine, that influence may not necessarily nor substantively have been through Paul but rather through Church Fathers who were more directly affected by Platonism - Justin Martyr, Eusebius, Clement, Augustine

 

[frobert]

It does not follow that Paul adopted Platonic notions in developing his theology.

Until you can show me where he does, you are not even making a circular argument.

“Through a glass darkly” doesn’t count as a theological notion. It is a nice metaphor and nothing more.

I haven’t responded because Prodigal_Son is far more knowledgeable about Plato than myself. Still, I would like to ask some questions. What difference does it make if St. Paul was influenced by Plato? Would it make his revelations more veracious? Would it make his revelations less veracious?

If God used Plato’s writings to prepare St. Paul for the his (God’s) revelations shouldn’t we still delight in them?