儒家會如何看待同性婚姻的合法化？

How Should Confucianism View the Legalization of Same-sex Marriage?

Abstract

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.

首先闡明儒家與基督教及古希臘文化各自對於同性戀的態度。儒家與基督教的嚴厲排斥和古希臘人的某種鼓勵皆不同，對同性戀持一種有保留的寬容態度，對於同性戀個人的評價更是以其道德行為為依據。為了理解儒耶在這個問題上分歧的深層原因，審視了西方的二元分叉和古代中國陰陽互補對生的不同思想方式。儒家因此將同性戀人群的產生歸為陰陽發生過程的可能產物，有其自然的原因，並不是一種罪惡。但是，也正是由於儒家信持這樣一個陰陽生發的結構，她不可能贊許同性婚姻的合法化，因為同性戀者的結合畢竟不是陰陽化生的原真形態，將它與異性婚姻在法律地位上等同看待會導致一些對於人類社群長久延續不利的後果。它們包括：這種合法化會從道理上打開通向群婚制的缺口；它還可能會傷害一些無辜者；它具有的某種示範效應可能會引導那些在性別取向上的徘徊者走上他們本來不一定要選擇的性道路。本文的第三部分第一節還依據中英原文，考訂了美國最高法院的甘迺迪法官所引用的孔子話語，說明它在表達形式上的不嚴格和內容上的大致可行。又闡述了此法官的基本思想與這段引文及其上下文所代表的儒家思路的衝突。

First, the various attitudes towards homosexuality among Confucianism, Christianity and ancient Greek culture are considered. Distinguished from the Christian harsh repulsion and the Greek slight encouragement, Confucianism has been guardedly tolerant of homosexuality and judged homosexuals according to their personal moral behavior. To reveal the deep reasons for the distinction between Confucianism and Christianity on this issue, the paper examines the differences in thinking between the Western dichotomy and the Confucian genesis by the co-opposites of yin-yang. Confucianism explains homosexuality as one of the possible results of the yin-yang process. It is thereby a natural phenomenon, not an evil thing. However, it is due to this understanding that Confucianism cannot advocate the legalization of homosexual marriage, because a union between homosexuals does not belong to a true yin-yang means of combination and production. To treat it legitimately as being the same as a marriage between heterosexuals could lead to consequences that would be unfavorable to the longevity of human communities, which include, for instance, opening up the possibility of group marriage; hurting innocent people; and leading those who do not have a definite sexual tendency to make a homosexual decision. The third part of the paper refers to the Confucian saying cited by Anthony Kennedy, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the USA, in his statement on the ruling on same-sex marriage, and shows that his citation was inaccurate, but its content was not far from the original meaning of Confucius’ saying. Further, the conflict between Kennedy’s basic thinking and the Confucian thought demonstrated in the citation and its context is exposed.

DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 329 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.