readers have made that argument in comments posted over the last few days.

moral argument against interracial dating-28moral argument against interracial dating-13

Moral argument against interracial dating video

In many ways, today’s debate about same-sex marriage resembles earlier debates about interracial marriage. In at least two ways, however, the situations differ.

From the discriminator’s standpoint, opposing same-sex marriage is more defensible.

When a woman and a man commit themselves to each other, it is the cause of celebration and joy.

However, there definitely exist pros and cons about interracial dating and marriage.

But it can justify a person’s refusal to accept a same-sex relationship as a marriage. Stern points to Ian Millhiser’s useful summary of religious arguments that were once made against interracial marriage.

They include: “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents.

A rational person can maintain that a relationship between two people categorically incapable of producing children together—that is, two people of the same sex—can’t be a marriage. It’s certainly a less intrusive distinction to enforce.

That argument doesn’t justify denying them the right to love one another openly, nor does it justify denying them the benefits and honors we bestow on couples for making lifetime commitments. Many people think that this distinction is important enough to withhold the word “marriage” from same-sex couples; I think those people are being unjust and obtuse to the moral reality of homosexual love. I can, however, dismiss as irrational any objection to interracial marriage.

At the same time, from the target’s standpoint, it’s more oppressive.