Mr. Irons

Jeremy Irons, in an interview with the Huffington Post, said he worries about gay "marriage." Of course, he has garnered heaps of criticism for daring to question the homosexual agenda. Mr. Irons does not go into a great defense of traditional marriage. In fact, his response is quite ethereal and relativistic. Here are a few of the quotes, in case you don't want to watch the video:

“It seems to me that now they’re fighting for the name,” Irons said. “I worry that it means somehow we debase, or we change, what marriage is. I just worry about that.”
...................
“Could a father not marry his son?” asked Irons.
“Well, there are laws against incest,” said the host.
“It’s not incest between men,” Irons replied. “Incest is there to protect us from inbreeding, but men don’t breed.”

Mr. Irons says a bit more in the interview, and by no means do I agree with all that he says, but I think he's on to something here. I disagree with Mr. Irons that incest is wrong simply because of inbreeding, but at least he recognizes that marriage and sex laws are connected to procreation. Laws that promote marriage (such as tax breaks) or forbid certain arrangements (such as same-sex "marriages") or sexual actions (such as incest) are created, in large part, for the protection and promotion of children. And perhaps Mr. Irons, in his own way, understands this.