Another look at the Definition of Marriage

I've written about the spat between Focus on the Family and the American Anthropological Association about the definition of marriage. Glenn Stanton of FotF has written a report that apparently fixed many of the objections the AAA had of his original web article (I haven't read it). Now Patrick M. Chapman, anthropologist and author of "Thou Shalt Not Love": What Evangelicals Really Say to Gays has written a critique of Stanton's article. Some highlights:

It is refreshing for Stanton (and FotF to recognize that anthropologists are experts in understanding and defining marriage. It is good to see that polygamy is rejected in the West because Western societies that practice it usually reduce women to property. It is refreshing for Stanton to say that marriage "transcends" religion, thus the term "sanctity of marriage" is not supported anthropologically. It is refreshing for Stanton to acknowledge that gays are capable of longstanding relationships.

Studies of other cultures show that people are seen both in terms of biological sex and also in terms of gender, which in this case means the roles assigned by society to men and women. In societies with such strong roles one member of a same-sex couple will take the male role and the other will take the female role. This has no meaning in Western societies that have done away with gender roles. Because of this FotF cannot claim that a child needs a parent of each sex. Both men and women can take on roles we traditionally assign to men and women. Gender expression is highly varied, so even if the parents are of the opposite sex does not mean they are taking the opposite gender roles. Children do not learn gender from just parents. They also learn it from the extended family and from society (Disney is great at teaching gender roles).

Stanton includes a summary of the anthropological view of marriage, apparently in an attempt to show why it must be reserved for opposite-sex couples. Chapman goes through the list and states each one of them applies to gay couples as well as straight. Both types provide for continuation of people and culture, serve the good of families, provide the needs of children, etc.

After all the refreshing statements by Stanton on behalf of Focus on the Family, it is now time for them to acknowledge they deceived readers when they said anthropologists agree with the "traditional definition of marriage" and to issue public apologies. Failure to do so means FotF is more concerned with its political agenda than its Christian identity.