Ryan T. Anderson

Sherif Girgis

Robert P. George

Until yesterday, no society had seen marriage as anything other than a conjugal partnership: a male-female union. What Is Marriage? identifies and defends the reasons for this historic consensus and shows why redefining civil marriage is unnecessary, unreasonable, and contrary to the common good. Originally published in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, this book's core argument quickly became the year's most widely read essay on the most prominent scholarly network in the social sciences. Since then, it has been cited and debated by scholars and activists throughout the world as the most formidable defense of the tradition ever written. Now revamped, expanded, and vastly improved, What Is Marriage? stands poised to meet its moment as few books of this generation have. Rhodes Scholar Sherif Girgis, Heritage Foundation Fellow Ryan T. Anderson, and Robert P. George offer a devastating critique of the idea that equality requires redefining marriage. They show why both sides must first answer the question of what marriage really is. They defend the principle that marriage, as a comprehensive union of mind and body ordered to family life, unites a man and a woman as husband and wife, and they document the social value of applying this principle in law. Most compellingly, they show that those who embrace same-sex civil marriage leave no firm ground--none--for not recognizing every relationship describable in polite English, including polyamorous sexual unions, and that enshrining their view would further erode the norms of marriage, and hence the common good. Finally, What Is Marriage? decisively answers common objections: that the historic view is rooted in bigotry, like laws forbidding interracial marriage; that it is callous to people's needs; that it can't show the harm of recognizing same-sex couplings, or the point of recognizing infertile ones; and that it treats a mere "social construct" as if it were natural, or an unreasoned religious view as if it were rational. If the marriage debate in America is decided soon, it will be with this book's help or despite its powerful arguments.

Man and Woman : a Defense

What is Marriage?

Ryan Timothy Anderson

Robert Peter George

Oddajemy do rąk Czytelników książkę napisaną w 2012 roku, gdy przez Stany Zjednoczone przetaczała się dyskusja pomiędzy stronami, które na tytułowe pytanie „Czym jest małżeństwo?” udzielały zgoła odmiennych odpowiedzi. Spór ten toczył się właściwie w całej przestrzeni publicznej. Jak zauważają autorzy książki: „W ciągu zaledwie kilku lat do bitwy o małżeństwo włączyły się wszystkie szczeble i wszystkie działy amerykańskiej administracji państwowej, rozlała się ona też na całe społeczeństwo. Widzieliśmy, jak władza wykonawcza sygnuje, wetuje i wprowadza w życie określone decyzje; na poziomie federalnym i stanowym widzieliśmy akty prawne – te czekające na orzeczenie sądu i te wprowadzane w życie; widzieliśmy batalie sądowe toczone wokół owych decyzji i aktów normatywnych; mniej więcej w dwu trzecich wszystkich naszych stanów byliśmy świadkami referendów w tej sprawie; w całym kraju odbywały się debaty z udziałem przedstawicieli akademii, stowarzyszeń zawodowych, mediów, wspólnot religijnych i osób prywatnych, które przynajmniej opowiadały się za jedną ze stron. Trudno sobie wyobrazić budzący większe emocje konflikt kulturowy”. Dla polskich czytelników książka ta jest pewnym stanowiskiem w sprawie, która coraz częściej staje się przedmiotem debat publicznych. Stanowiskiem, z którym można się zgodzić lub nie, ale bez wątpienia jest ona dowodem, że na drażliwe, zarówno społecznie, jak i osobiście, tematy można rozmawiać w sposób rzeczowy, a emocje z powodzeniem da się zastąpić argumentami. Emocje nie podlegają dyskusji, argumenty – owszem, a tych ostatnich w polskich debatach bardzo często brakuje. Książka stanowi również dowód na to, że akademicy, naukowcy, mogą z powodzeniem wychodzić na agorę i przekonywać do swoich racji. W polskich warunkach jest to model deficytowy. Pogrążeni w książkach, ukryci w laboratoriach i salach wykładowych badacze z rzadka zabierają głos publicznie, stworzeni raczej do obserwowania niż do doradzania. Fragment wprowadzenia

Czym jest małżeństwo? W obronie związku mężczyzny i kobiety

John Corvino

Virtually everyone supports religious liberty, and virtually everyone opposes discrimination. But how do we handle the hard questions that arise when exercises of religious liberty seem to discriminate unjustly? How do we promote the common good while respecting conscience in a diverse society? This point-counterpoint book brings together leading voices in the culture wars to debate such questions: John Corvino, a longtime LGBT-rights advocate, opposite Ryan T. Anderson and Sherif Girgis, prominent young social conservatives. Many such questions have arisen in response to same-sex marriage: How should we treat county clerks who do not wish to authorize such marriages, for example; or bakers, florists, and photographers who do not wish to provide same-sex wedding services? But the conflicts extend well beyond the LGBT rights arena. How should we treat hospitals, schools, and adoption agencies that can't in conscience follow antidiscrimination laws, healthcare mandates, and other regulations? Should corporations ever get exemptions? Should public officials? Should we keep controversial laws like the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or pass new ones like the First Amendment Defense Act? Should the law give religion and conscience special protection at all, and if so, why? What counts as discrimination, and when is it unjust? What kinds of material and dignitary harms should the law try to fight-and what is dignitary harm, anyway? Beyond the law, how should we treat religious beliefs and practices we find mistaken or even oppressive? Should we tolerate them or actively discourage them? In point-counterpoint format, Corvino, Anderson and Girgis explore these questions and more. Although their differences run deep, they tackle them with civility, clarity, and flair. Their debate is an essential contribution to contemporary discussions about why religious liberty matters and what respecting it requires.

Debating Religious Liberty and Discrimination

Robert George

Until very recently, no society had seen marriage as anything other than a conjugal partnership: a male–female union. What Is Marriage? identifies and defends the reasons for this historic consensus and shows why redefining civil marriage as something other than the conjugal union of husband and wife is a mistake. Originally published in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, this book’s core argument quickly became the year’s most widely read essay on the most prominent scholarly network in the social sciences. Since then, it has been cited and debated by scholars and activists throughout the world as the most formidable defense of the tradition ever written. Now revamped, expanded, and vastly enhanced, What Is Marriage? stands poised to meet its moment as few books of this generation have. Sherif Girgis, Ryan T. Anderson, and Robert P. George offer a devastating critique of the idea that equality requires redefining marriage. They show why both sides must first answer the question of what marriage really is. They defend the principle that marriage, as a comprehensive union of mind and body ordered to family life, unites a man and a woman as husband and wife, and they document the social value of applying this principle in law. Most compellingly, they show that those who embrace same-sex civil marriage leave no firm ground—none—for not recognizing every relationship describable in polite English, including polyamorous sexual unions, and that enshrining their view would further erode the norms of marriage, and hence the common good. Finally, What Is Marriage? decisively answers common objections: that the historic view is rooted in bigotry, like laws forbidding interracial marriage; that it is callous to people’s needs; that it can’t show the harm of recognizing same-sex couplings or the point of recognizing infertile ones; and that it treats a mere “social construct” as if it were natural or an unreasoned religious view as if it were rational.

Man and Woman: A Defense

What Is Marriage?

Ryan Anderson

Until just yesterday, no society--monogamous or polygamous—had defined marriage as anything other than a male-female union. With clear and cogent arguments, What Is Marriage? explains the rational basis of this historic consensus. It defeats the arguments for recognizing same-sex partnerships as marriages and shows how doing so would harm the common good. Originally published in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, this book’s core argument quickly became the year’s most widely read essay of more than 300,000 scholarly articles posted on the Social Sciences Research Network. Now expanded to address a flurry of prominent responses, What Is Marriage? stands poised to meet its moment as few books of this generation have. If the marriage debate in America is decided in the next few years, it will be either with this book’s help, or despite its powerful arguments. Rhodes Scholar Sherif Girgis, Princeton University professor Robert P. George, and Ryan T. Anderson, editor of the online journal Public Discourse, provide a devastating critique of the claim that equality requires redefining marriage. They point out that any assessment of what “marriage equality” demands depends on first determining what marriage is—what sort of relationships must be treated as essentially the same. They defend the principle that marriage, as a comprehensive union ordered to family life, requires a man and a woman. And they argue for the great social benefits of enshrining this principle in law. Most compellingly, they show that those who embrace same-sex civil marriage leave themselves no firm ground—none—for not recognizing as marriages every relationship type describable in polite English, including multiple-partner (“polyamorous”) sexual unions. Finally, What Is Marriage? decisively answer common objections: that the historic view is rooted in bigotry (like laws forbidding interracial marriage); that it is callous to people’s needs; that it can’t show the harm of recognizing same-sex couplings, or the point of recognizing infertile ones; and that it treats a mere “social construct” as if it were natural, or an unreasoned religious view as if it were rational.

Sherif Girgis

About

Books

Join the club