About Me

My photo
I have a burning need to know stuff and I love asking awkward questions.

Thursday, November 03, 2005

What’s the problem with Gay Marriage?

The sight of homosexual men and women having wedding days just like those enjoyed for thousands of years by heterosexuals is unsettling, just as, for some people, is the sight of them holding hands or kissing. Being aware of this just what is the case for allowing Gay Marriage?

The case for allowing gays to marry begins with equality, pure and simple. Why should one set of loving, consenting adults be denied a right that other such adults have and which, if exercised, will do no damage to anyone else? Not just because they have always lacked that right in the past, for sure: until the late 1960s, in some American states it was illegal for black adults to marry white ones, but precious few would defend that ban now on grounds that it was “traditional”. Another argument is rooted in semantics: marriage is the union of a man and a woman, and so cannot be extended to same-sex couples. They may live together and love one another, but cannot, on this argument, be “married”. But that is to dodge the real question—why not?—and to obscure the real nature of marriage, which is a binding commitment, at once legal, social and personal, between two people to take on special obligations to one another. If homosexuals want to make such marital commitments to one another, and to society, then why should they be prevented from doing so while other adults, equivalent in all other ways, are allowed to do so? All very good questions.

..and some tongue in cheek ‘reasoning’….

Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control are not natural.

Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people cannot get legally married because the world needs more children.

Obviously gay parents will raise gay children because straight parents only raise straight children.

Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since the Britney Spears 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.

Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and it hasn't changed at all: women are property, Blacks can't marry Whites, and divorce is illegal.

Gay marriage should be decided by the people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of minorities.

Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are always imposed on the entire country.

Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people makes you tall.

Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behaviour. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage license.

Children can never succeed without both male and female role models at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.

Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't adapted to cars or longer lifespans.

So what exactly IS the problem with Gay Marriage? How exactly will it “undermine the foundations of society” and just how with it “threaten the institution of marriage itself”? I can’t help finding it all very confusing…..

18 comments:

dbackdad said...

Great post, CK. Couldn't have said it better myself.

CyberKitten said...

Thanks... Some of it was mine... some of it was stolen from elsewhere... but why re-invent the wheel when you can boost it from someone else's car... (makes note to Blog on copyright at some point).

Gets the point across though. I watched with not a small amount of joy when Gay Marriages seemed to be breaking out all over the place... then the Government stepped in to stop it... and there I was thinking that the 'Pursuit of Happiness' was in the Constitution/Declaration of Independence or some such (IIRC).

Maybe that bit doesn't apply to Gay couples either?

Unknown said...

Civil partnership bill comes into force end of 2005 in UK making UK only the fourth country in the world (Canada Belgium(?) and Spain being the others) to recognise gay marriage.

Civil Liberties R US :-)

craziequeen said...

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

.. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

The real debate is the definition of happiness :-)

cq

CyberKitten said...

rca said: Civil Liberties R US :-)

It's getting there isn't it. Europe does seem to be a progressive place doesn't it.... and Canada too. Well done Canada!

CyberKitten said...

CK posted: But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

People just don't TALK like that anymore do they..... (grin)

Juggling Mother said...

You are asking the wrong question. the question that needs answering in this day and age is: What is marriage?

A)is marriage (as I have heard many people say) a religious ceremony, performed by various religions usually to sanction sexual relations and child-rearing?

B)Is marriage a legal contract assuming equal responsibility for financial/social responsibilities?

C)is marriage a social declaration of commitment between people to live together & work for their mutual benifit?

I'm sure other people will come up others too.

A) is purely religious, and therefore up to the religious communities to decide who, how, what, why etc. However, that should have no bearing on social/legal standing.

B) is purely legal and should apply to any two people, irrelevent of any personal circumstances/preferences

C) is purely social, and therefore does not need any kind of legislation other a contract evidencing the commitment, so would apply to all people.

IMHO marriage is a mixture of B & C. We got married mostly for the legal standing it gave us. Gay couples should be entitled to the same rights & protections as we are.

CyberKitten said...

Mrs A - Thanks for that...

Questions do tend to lead to more questions (with the odd clarification of definitions thrown in for good measure) don't they?

Good point(s), well made.

JR said...

CK: I've been thinking myself about copyrights and blogs, since I'm quite handy at liberating essentials for my own blog. ;-)

As for gay marriage, speaking as one in a same-sex relationship, I find it offensive that my ex-husband can jump in and out of multiple marriages, not pay child support, and that's okay to many. Yet my partner can raise and support his kids with no tax credits or government benefits or even social acknowledgment for all she does, and we're somehow asking for "special privileges?" I say we should either all get the government benefits and legal protections or none of us do. Take them away from the married couples and let them struggle for a year and see how quickly they come to realize how unfair this is. Okay, done with the soapbox, "Next!" :-)

CyberKitten said...

Welcome Vancouver voyeur. I liked your comment on beret's & camo on GWB's Blog. (chuckle)

You said: CK: I've been thinking myself about copyrights and blogs, since I'm quite handy at liberating essentials for my own blog. ;-)

Nothing wrong with a bit of liberation now & again... after all if its digital it's just TOO easy to rip off...

You also said: I say we should either all get the government benefits and legal protections or none of us do.

Damned right.... I'm guessing your experince is far from unusual. Whatever happened to justice & equal rights....? Maybe one day.... Maybe....

JR said...

Okay, I just posted something on my site about copyrights, peruse at your leisure. It seems like CYA by acknowledging and linking to the source and not taking anything in its entirety is the rule of thumb. Most bloggers probably won't be harassed about this.

greatwhitebear said...

You are a VERY funny lady! Great post!

CyberKitten said...

GWB said: You are a VERY funny lady! Great post!

Thanks - though I can't take credit for all of it.... Actually I can't take credit for most of it. I just steal from good sources...

Oh... & I ain't no lady... (rotflmao)

Aginoth said...

Go on CK post a picture of you in a little black dress we could do with a laugh {ROTFLMAO}

CyberKitten said...

Mr A... WHAT a suggestion....! Children might be reading this Blog... Or people of a nervous disposition!

Shame on you.....

craziequeen said...

Please no - ck in a little black dress..?

Mind you, I have one I can lend *him*.......

I'm so subtle....

cq

stc said...

Re "liberating" things from other blogs — I don't see any reason why you couldn't give them credit for providing the material. "Hat tip" and a link is a standard practice in the blogosphere. Why don't you do it?

Re gay marriage — I'm proud to be a citizen of a country that has legalized it. If anyone could come up with any argument to demonstrate that homosexuality will harm society, I would consider opposing it.

Conservatives in Canada tried mightily, but they were utterly unable to mount a persuasive case.
Q

CyberKitten said...

Q said: Re "liberating" things from other blogs — I don't see any reason why you couldn't give them credit for providing the material. "Hat tip" and a link is a standard practice in the blogosphere. Why don't you do it?

Well... some of this post was 'stolen' from other websites - not other Blogs.

..and I'm still new to this stuff.... and I have issues... which I'll blog about later....