A commendable resolution from the californian judiciary as this article suggests. And while the Chief Justice's statement - The essence of the right to marry is freedom to join in marriage with the person of one’s choice- noteworthy his comparison of same-sex marriage with inter-racial union was a bit enterprising, I thought. Notice the following criticism of the resolution. And while it might have its wisdom in Christian bigotry as opposed to scientific reasoning, I couldn't help noticing that it conveyed a fundamental point:
“Sure, it works at the surface level,” Mr. Stewart continued. “But it is actually defeated by the deeper reality of marriage itself. Marriage in its deep logic has nothing to do with race and everything to do with the union of a man and a woman. To apply Perez in the genderless marriage context is actually to betray it.”
A silly question popped up in my mind by the time I was finished with the article, the latter part of which was pretty uninteristing- Is it necessary for two sexes to exist in higher forms? Is there a distinct biological/evolutionary advantage to it?
5 comments:
Interesting. Although I think Dawkins does answer this question to some extent. Cross-overs are necessary for evolution and hence to evolve into higher species we do need two different cells to meet. These could be of the same sex, but one of them has to bear the burden of growing the embryo(at least in terrestrial animals). And hence the two sexes. Of course, you can always ask why not something like trees where both the sexes are in the same flower. But i think the debate over what could be is always unending. There will be an infinite number of schemes that could have worked, and even more that could have and have failed.
I'm aware of Dawkins' answer but I was thinking of other possibilities. You're probably right when you say that "debate over what could be is always unending". But isn't that the primary vocation of imagination, and to an extent science too? :-)
I used to read this speculative science fiction article by this guy called mukul sharma in TOI ong ago [before they embraced punny headlines and bikinis] and he had talked once about a time when the sexual experience will be augumented with the possibility of having a myraid of sexes. Essentially reproduction will cease to be a motivation as better genetic techniques will be available and then humans will start to change their bodies as they want them to be.
i think it will be quite interesting. views anyone
"myriad of sexes"? Unfortunately I cannot stretch my current imagination beyond two :-)
exactly what intrigued me about the piece. this will have to be a stage of technology when we have understood neurocognition to such an extent that we can produce completely new sensations. apart from the current ones of love, hate, anger etc. higher sensations and feelings. including different versions of sexual ecstacy. Something absolutely not experienced before.
There is even some porn in insti about something like that. its computer generated, Has this man and woman who are flying thru the sky and having sex in midair and their bodies are changing colour in a kaleidescope of colours as they approach climax..
Absolutely unstimulating sexually it did provide food for thought with regard to the possible biological futures of the human race.
Post a Comment