RSS
Facebook
Twitter
E-PrinceReader Comments
In new book, George, Girgis GS argue for traditional marriage
Published: Sunday, November 18th, 2012
Politics professor Robert George and philosophy student Sherif Girgis GS aim to make a compelling argument for the traditionalist view of marriage in a forthcoming book, set to be published in December.
The book — titled “What is Marriage? Man and ...
(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
yo, Ryan Anderson is Class of '04.
And Sherif is Class of '08, as well as being GS..
He's also a Rhodes Scholar, let's be a little less biased, Prince.
This was basically WWS370 lecture a few days ago...lame
Come on, 'Prince. Are you kidding me? Nearly half of this very short article is comprised of Stephen Macedo dismissing the book without having read it. You try to make it look as if he represents Princetonians, while George, et. al. do not. That's silly. A few years ago, half of the Princeton undergraduate student population voted against a new definition of marriage for the amicus brief the USG sent to the NJ legislature.
This is the worst smugly biased excused for an article I've ever read.
Holy reproductive unit, Batman! The first six comments in the early morning hours are all picayunely critical! - - - Coincidence? You and your partner decide . . . People, this is a brief news item, not a book review. As such, pretty well done.
The article states that George apparently refused to speak to the Prince, so. He had his shot to defend his defense, but Macedo was willing to talk.
Why was Macedo quoted if fhe knows nothing about the book?
Macedo knows the arguments pretty well. Not reading the book actually doesn't make a huge difference here. I'm surprised by one of his comments, though. It is true that many if not most of Girgis' (et al.) opponents don't find his arguments for traditional marriage persuasive. But it's also true that most of them (Macedo excluded) haven't understood those arguments very well, if at all.