"The Definition of Marriage"

The OU Philosophy Department recently invited Professor John Corvino to lead his lecture “The Definition of Marriage” and conduct a Q-&-A. The topic of the lecture was marriage and the controversy of fully benefitted and dually named same-sex marriage. The event took place Friday, Sept. 9 in Room 121 Dale Hall.

After OU Philosophy Professor Martin Montminy introduced Professor Corvino, he began his lecture by explaining the differences in how people perceive marriage and the nature of it. According to Corvino, the nature of “marriage” is what is holding marriage equality back.

Currently there are six states in America that legally recognize same-sex marriage: Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont plus Washington D.C. The fight for same-sex marriage equality has grown rapidly the past decade, but there are many challenges put forth by the federal government.

Corvino provided a real-life example of why marriage equality is necessary across the board. He said he carries a Durable Power of Attorney for Healthcare Decisions stating his partner is allowed to have the same benefits as a heterosexual partner if he were to be rushed to the hospital in a state that does not lawfully recognize same-sex marriage.

“I’m fighting for what I call marriage equality where same-sex couples can have marriage,” Corvino said. “In the mean time, I’m also a pragmatist and an incrementalist. There are certain states…that I think marriage is a ways off, but maybe some kind of limited domestic partnership or civil union thing…” 

According to Corvino, the Definitional Object which argues that if the term “marriage” were to be used for same-sex marriages, then ultimately the practice of marriage would be altered and lose its value. He uses a metaphor of an onion grown in two different places to exemplify his point.

“Using a blanket term to cover both of them [onions] distorts reality in a certain way,” Corvino said. “…but same-sex relationships and different-sex relationships are not interchangeable. It’s not a purely verbal disagreement…it’s about the nature of things, something distinctive about heterosexual relationships that deserves a special word.”

 This special word is categorized as a privileged title. Those against gay marriage think heterosexual marriage only deserves the title of "marriage".

He explained that opponents of gay marriage such as The New Natural Law hold a conjugal view that limits marriage to a union between a man and a woman united biologically through coitus. Proponents of the issue hold a revisionist view looking at marriage as an emotional union of two people of any sex who commit to mutual care and who may engage in any sexual acts mutually agreed upon.

Corvino’s method during his entire lecture was to discuss the opponent’s view and then concentrate on the flaws in their thinking to point out his own views.

According to The New Natural Law Version, marriage must be between a man and woman, hold the value of procreation and doesn’t need “reproductive-type" acts.

Corvino’s three biggest counterexamples toward The New Natural Law’s view were the paraplegic, the permanent contraceptor and the divorcees. With each of these examples, the couple is heterosexual, yet it does not carry out all of the requirements of a “real marriage” according to the conjugal view.  Therefore, according to The New Natural Law, these marriages are not real.

Corvino and the revisionist view look at real marriage as a union based on emotion and not the need for reproduction.

The lecture concluded with a quote from Pope John Pail II. “The inner and essential raison d’être of marriage is not simply eventual transformation into a family but above all the creation of a lasting personal union…based on love.”

The Q-&-A began after a short break after the lecture portion. One of the first questions asked inquired Corvino’s definition of marriage. His response was that he could come up with definitions but not a single one. He sees marriage as a complex social institution that looks different from different angles.

Other questions included his views on discrimination of separate but equal, his views on polygamy and where he thinks the limit of marriage will expand to.

Polygamy was brought up to demonstrate that if a marriage between same sexes is acceptable, then why should a marriage of more than one of the sexes be excluded.

After mentioning some of the social issues and public policy factors against a polygamist relationship, Corvino goes on to say, “if three or four people come to me and they are in this polyandrous relationship and they’re happy, I’d tell them knock yourselves out.”

The questioning lasted for over an hour and Professor Montminy thanked Professor Corvino with applause once time ran out.

 “We were pleasantly surprised that so many people attended the lecture,” Montminy said after the event. “There are no specific plans to invite Professor Corvino in the near future, but we certainly do not rule out the possibility of inviting him again.”

Professor John Corvino teaches at Wayne State University in Detroit, Mich. He focuses on ethics and LGBT studies. He has written two books, “Debating Same Sex Marriage” and “What’s Wrong with Homosexuality?”. He is also a column writer for the website 365gay.com with his “Gay Moralist” pieces. In 2006, Corvino received the President’s Award of Excellence in Teaching.