Debating Same-Sex Marriage:

A Teleological Perspective
Suyash Saxena,
Jawaharlal Nehru University,
S.Q.30 Munirka Vihar,
Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi, 110067,
suyashsaxena@gmail.com

The views on same-sex marriage and the recent Supreme Court verdict on sexual relationship
between homosexuals have been more or less homologous and unidirectional; almost all against
the verdict. Views welcoming the verdict mostly argue from the staunch religious or some
parochial moral position which to a great extent fail to appeal to our reason. As a result, to most
of us the verdict that incriminates two consenting adult individuals for having an intercourse just
because they happen to have a particular sexual orientation seems almost counter-intuitive and
outrageous. Any balanced debate on it seems totally out of question. However, these questions of
justice towards the homosexual community couldnt have lingered on through history had they
not been essentially contested issues. The intent of this article is to put forth a debate on samesex marriage. The subject of this debate is same-sex marriage and not just same-sex
intercourse which is the subject of the verdict. The debate aims to examine the institution of
marriage from a teleological perspective and on the lines of teleology argue for and against. To
clarify, teleology is the theory about the purposiveness of an institution or an organism. It is
derived from the word telos- the aim, goal and purpose of an activity. Since the times of Aristotle
teleology has been the basis of several debates and several theories of politics and sociology are
grounded in teleology. Therefore teleological perspective is chosen for the purpose of the debate
to lend a better vantage point. To bring out the teleological perspective the question we need to
address is What are the telos (purpose) of the institution of marriage?

Against:
Several psychologists argue that man is by nature a monogamous animal. Emotions of love,
affection and bonding that cement marital relationships have been handed down to us through
evolution. Even jealousy toward an extra-marital partner is argued to be a product of evolution
making us more or less monogamous. Thus the institution of marriage has its roots in the
evolutionary history of man. With lower species of protozoan and viruses being asexual, sexes
developed through evolution; then came sexual love in species like reptiles and finally filial love
between the parent and the progeny and platonic love between the mating individuals evolved
during the last stages of evolution. Platonic love gave rise to marriage with the individuals

staying together even after mating and out of filial love rose the family. If the roots of marriage
are founded on evolution then the purpose (telos) of marriage could be easily established. The
purpose of every evolutionary change is to produce a fitter race. The two sexes stay together
after mating (as in marriage) only to rear a better progeny and hence a fitter race. The binding
forces of marital relations and family i.e. platonic love and filial love have a meaning only in the
achievement of the goal of evolution- to produce a fitter race. Since the same-sex relationships
fail to deliver this basic purpose of evolution which defines the institution of marriage they
cannot be considered to be within the definition of marriage. If the evolutionary argument is
strictly adhered to, all same-sex relationships can be seen to be aberrations to the institution of
marriage. (This, however, does make it legitimate to criminalise them.)

For:
Marriage is not merely a biological or evolutionary institution. It may have its roots in evolution
but marriage is essentially a social institution. Marriage institutionalizes human emotions of love,
care and affection and legitimizes them into the social fabric. Those emotions may happen to
deliver some evolutionary purpose but they are not valued solely because of the evolutionary role
they play in raising a fitter progeny. They are defining qualities of the human being and hence
are ends in themselves. Any institution that institutionalizes these qualities is legitimate as it
simply recognizes the defining characteristics of human being. If same sex marriages help
recognizing the basic human traits of love and affection between individuals and institutionalize
them into the social and cultural fibre they serve their intended purpose and hence are legitimate.