What is Marriage? (Part 1)

What is marriage? Discovering a definition from the bottom up. Part 1. Geometrical definitions.

While in my second year of high school, I was exposed to a subdivision of arithmetic known as geometry. To my adolescent whore,

I would be responsible for constructing various proofs based upon postulates on a daily basis. For those who don't know, postulates are statements assumed to be true, derived from definitions.

While I considered the work to be tedious, grueling, and nothing short of slave labor, I later understood the value in my hours of study.

I discovered that behind every mathematical formula existed a postulate, and behind every postulate stood a definition. A few years later, in physics lab during my first full semester at college,

I experienced first -hand verification for the mathematical formulas I had discovered in geometry. I realized that although definitions were technically unproven, they were legitimately true because they corresponded to reality.

Natural law had set the guidelines for definitions, and to avoid confusion, etymology had given us the terms used to designate them.

For instance, in the English language, the term line can be defined as the shortest distance between two points.

Based on this definition, it is reasonable to postulate that two lines can intersect at only one point.

The building blocks of the most complex mathematical formulas are therefore derived from reasonable assumptions considered to be self -evident.

Self -evident truths It is with this basic understanding of natural law that Thomas Jefferson affirmed the concept of inalienable rights in our

Declaration of Independence. Of course, natural revelation is only one aspect of God's disclosure to mankind.

There's also what theologians call special revelation, in the form of the Bible. Utilizing both divine sources, it is without question possible to systematically set the parameters for an authentic definition of marriage.

For the last decade, conservatives have parroted the majority argument in favor of traditional marriage.

This top -down approach is essentially upside -down in regards to the proper way in which to deduce a conclusion about anything.

Unfortunately, as a result, most conservatives haven't been exposed to a basic bottom -up reasoning system for holding to heterosexual marriage.

A bottom -up approach starts with premises, just as mathematical definitions start with presuppositions about the natural world, that it's orderly, etc.

Part Two Premise One The Universe is Designed Natural Revelation A System of Mechanisms Every system in the material world fulfills a basic function.

Most functions are simple to realize. The water cycle, photosynthesis, and even tiny bacterial flagellum demonstrate that something or someone's intentions are being carried out on a daily basis.

When it comes to human beings, it is obvious that reproduction is the result of sexual practice in which two individuals of opposite genders mate.

Inside this reproduction mechanism is a pleasurable natural incentive. Sexually parallel differentiated organs are part of the blueprint every male and female are born with.

Intuition dictates that these specialized organs' natural incentives and resultant byproducts are the result of a correctly functioning mechanism intended to produce offspring.

Once progeny are born, they come into the world in a rather feeble state. There exists no natural arrangement by which babies can care for themselves.

Therefore, it should come as no surprise that the development of sexual organs within human beings occurs within a specific time parameter, starting at the commencement of the period in which he or she will be fully capable of caring for offspring.

Natural law has also dictated a basic arrangement in which offspring are to be cared for. Observing the

System In Walt Larimore's book, His Brain, Her Brain, How Divinely Designated Differences Can Strengthen Your Marriage, a case is made that men and women have a mutually beneficial relationship based upon the differences granted them by nature.

In The Difference Between Men and Women's Brains, Whitney Hopler summarizes some of the key points made by Dr.

Walt. Male and female brains are dramatically different anatomically, chemically, hormonally, and psychologically.

Those differences cause fundamental different ways of thinking, feeling, and behaving. Such differences include the fact that men are wired to provide financially for their families, while women are wired to provide the emotional security of a peaceful home.

When speaking about the differences between male and female brains, Hopler writes, The male brain is highly systematized, with a high ability to compartmentalize, a low ability to multitask, a high ability to control emotions, a low relational orientation, a high project orientation, a high ability to zone out, a tendency to act first and think later when faced with stress, an aggressive response to risk, and a tendency to compete with other males.

The female brain is highly empathetic, with a low ability to compartmentalize, a high ability to multitask, a low ability to control emotions, a relational orientation, a low project orientation, a low ability to zone out, a tendency to think and feel before acting in response to stress, a cautious response to risk, and a tendency to cooperate with other females.

These differences have a profound impact on communication, sexual activity, and nearly every aspect associated with the relationship between two humans of the opposite gender.

Dr. Larimore's conclusion is that natural differences, when coupled with humility, serve to strengthen relationships.

Biological science has verified many of these observed natural differences. In the subfield of biochemistry, it has been established that women produce the hormone oxytocin during labor and lactation.

It was discovered that both men and women also secrete this hormone during sex, relaxation, massage, touch, warmth, and light pressure on all parts of the body.

This particular hormone drives the tend and befriend emotions under stress -mediating maternal behavior, facilitating bonding, and actually allows adult pair bonding.

This is thought to increase the survival of the individual and her offspring. Men, on the other hand, due to a different set of hormones, react to stress with the emotions associated with the more aggressive fight -or -flight mentality.

Testosterone is also known to negate the effects of oxytocin. A study done using a monogamous rodent species showed that oxytocin also reinforces monogamy.

The presence of this hormone is one of the reasons women tend to be monogamous. This is also just one example of how, biologically, women are hardwired for the care of offspring.

In the book Why Marriage Matters, Glenn T. Stanton examines research by the APP concerning children in nontraditional environments.

Stanton states, We find that when children grow up, any time without their biological mother or father, that they face serious declines in a whole host of important well -being measures.

Kids who grow up with both biological parents tend to do better in every important measure of well -being. It ought not to seem unnatural that, since the beginning of record history, the family unit has existed and ensured the survival of preceding generations.

Nature has mandated the function of producing offspring solely to heterosexuals. In addition, creation has revealed a preference for monogamous heterosexuals in the function of nurturing offspring.

Pat Buchanan unapologetically declared this verifiable premise on the April 16th edition of MSNBC's Hardball.

But don't we have civil law that allowed for divorce even when churches did not? Don't we have cases where there's civil decisions about marriage that depart from church doctrine?

I'm not talking about church doctrine, I'm talking about natural law, Chris. The law of human nature, which is designed by God.

And quite frankly, you cannot redefine, you can redefine it and say what it is, but that's playing let's pretend.

Is monogamy natural law? Yes, monogamous relationship in a marriage is natural law. But states have allowed people having serial marriages.

States have allowed polygamy in some cases, there's no doubt about it. Serial marriages, one after another after another. Yep, and that's monogamous relationships in a serial relationship.

Do you think that's natural? I think the relationship between a man and a woman for the procreation of children is natural.