Same-sex unions...
You know, I think it's great that nations of the world are opening their eyes and allowing unions between same-sex partners. I think a civil union between two people is the same whether the couple are same-sex or opposite sex. If they are willing to join their lives together, let them! Religious leaders are throwing fits but that's too bad. A church's doctrine can forbid a union between same-sex people - it's that church's right to refuse it, but a civil union....that's a different story. Opposite-sex partners can obtain a civil union without endorsement from the church, therefore let same-sex partners obtain the same...
Just my two cents!
Article: Canada legalizes gay marriage
3 comments:
Now you did it. You had to go and get my dander up. Well in my opinion...
I think same sex marriage are wrong morally but what they do in the privacy of their home is fine with me. I have no problem with them getting civil unions but have major problems when they want tax benefits, insurance benefits, or any other sort of spousal benefits associated with being in a healthy relationship by getting an official marriage recognized by the government. Mark my words, the only reason this is an issue is for the benefits and not because they want to get an official contract saying they are now married.
* Sorry but sometimes the conservative side of me takes over.
I have no problem with any relationship anyone wants to have with another consenting adult. Have a great time, knock yourselves out.
But marriage began as a religious instituion. The state didn't enter into the marriage thing until fairly recently in world history. In the US example, the state recognized marriage as a valuable social institution. Successfuly married couples tend to breed children, to provide stable homes and take care of their own children, and have stable incomes.
Don't quote the divorce stats now. We all know, successful marriages between a loving male and female provide the very best option for families and raising children. And they ARE the overwhelming majority of families. There's just no debating it. EVERY other option, even when its the only option left, is a poor second.
There's a social fabric that is woven in communities that share values, and families have always been a bedrock of the community. So, the state recognized that and provided some protections and encouragements for it.
So now, in the interest of understanding, diversity, universal acceptence... whatever other jargon you want to slap on it... people demand priviledges that don't exist. They don't exist because society has, in general, deemed those priviledges outside the norm, and non-productive for society.
Face it... homosexuals want the "right" to marry individuals of the same sex. There is no commonality between homosexual familes and heterosexual families. No common ground on which to build community. There's no pro-creation. There is no compelling reason society should sanction and protect same-sex marriages, other than those who are homosexual demand it. They claim it's how they are made, and cannot change it, so they should be granted the same rights as others who are made the way they are (heterosexuals).
Using that arguement, are we soon to legalize child molesting? Most child molesters are unable to change the fact that they are attracted to children. That why they re-offend at such an alarming rate. Of course not. Society has deemed children worthy of protecting, so we protect them.
I think US society spoke up pretty loud during the last election when same-sex marriage laws were shot down in all 11 states where they were on the ballot. I think we need to continue to shout loudly that the same-sex marriage issue is wrong.
Again.. IMHO
I disagree.
"There is no commonality between homosexual familes and heterosexual families. No common ground on which to build community."
Same-sex couples are fully capable of having the same characteristics of community as heterosexual families. The union on which they're basing their lives is just as loving and supportive as any other. They are just as neighborly, just as family-oriented despite their inability to create children of their own, and just as capable of being an active part of their "community" as heterosexual couples.
"Using that arguement, are we soon to legalize child molesting?"
I don't think this is an appropriate comparison. A person's sexual orientation is not the same as child molestation. For an adult to molest a helpless child is an evil, sick thing. Being homosexual is not evil or sick. (I'm speaking of "sick" as a psychological thing - a mental illness.)
I've lived in a very liberal city for over 12 years. I work with homosexuals who have been in healthy, loving relationships longer than most marriages. Some have adopted children and created happy, loving families. I know people think that children will be influenced toward homosexuality in a family like this, but I can tell you that, in one family, the oldest daughter does not share the orientation of her parents and, in fact, has a boyfriend.
I don't think people can see beyond their own prejudices to allow these couples a chance to show how stable their relationships truly are. It took me awhile to get beyond mine and I am very glad I had the opportunities that I was given to work with and become friends with individuals of same-sex relationships.
Post a Comment