Should people of middle sex and eunuch be able to marry? This is in continuation of the discussion "Should homosexuals be able to marry?" In Islam, the primary objective of marriage is continuity of the human race so any of  these are not allowed to marry, as it does not fulfil the primary objective. The discussion is aimed to ascertain the position of such a marriage in the west and other religions, and how people think about it.

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

I think you will find the West takes a different view of marriage in general.  We often claim that we marry because we want to show our love for our partner or because we want to recognize the union of two people.  There are many couples who marry and choose not to have children.  In general, procreation is not seen as the primary purpose for marriage by society at large.  There is great debate right now about same sex marriage.  I do not think you would find the same debate about the marriage of middle sex or eunuch peoples.  Perhaps this is because it is less of a public issue.  Most people with these conditions keep them quiet.  A same sex marriage is a little more obvious to the public eye.  Again, many societies do not see marriage as a vehicle for procreation so they would not take issue with a couple marring that would not produce children.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Islam is a religion, and as such, its ideas regarding marriage and its purpose should certainly be upheld by those who practice it.  However, there are two societal interests in a marriage, those of religion and those of the state.  In any country that is not a theocracy, the principles of any particular religion should take no part in the regulation of marriage. 

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

I believe like other "mixed" marriages, same-sex marriage is here to stay in the USA. As the previous post mentioned, married couples are not required to procreate, so it would be ludicrous to use this excuse exclusively for same-sex unions. I have more of a problem with the financial and tax benefits that such marriages extend to its couples, but I believe that the personal freedom aspect overrides such considerations.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Of course, we in the West have a great deal of conflict over this issue so there will be many different opinions about it.  My own view is that we do not limit marriage to the procreative function.  We do not force people to get divorced if they cannot procreate.  We do not require them to promise to have children in order to marry.  Therefore, we should not disqualify homosexuals from marrying simply because they are not going to procreate.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
Soaring plane image

We’ll help your grades soar

Start your 48-hour free trial and unlock all the summaries, Q&A, and analyses you need to get better grades now.

  • 30,000+ book summaries
  • 20% study tools discount
  • Ad-free content
  • PDF downloads
  • 300,000+ answers
  • 5-star customer support
Start your 48-Hour Free Trial