posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 09:12 PM
Oh ok, happy to oblige, and I appreciate the civility (honestly).
So, here we go.
12 Reasons Same-Sex Marriage will Ruin Society:
Written by GatorGSA (the UF Gay-Straight Alliance: gatorgsa.org)
1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses,
polyester, and birth control are not natural.
The fact that it is unnatural is used unilaterally, as an absolute. This to me promotes a fallacious arguement by speaking in absolutes. Not all
natural things are good and not all unnatural things are bad. This proves nor disproves anything.
2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people cannot get legally married because the world needs
This is sort of true. It's not so much that they specifically "produce" children, but rather they do the act that produces children. The act
of consummation is the fulfillment of the ritual of marriage. It is, to use the definition, the completion of the ceremony that has been celebrated
and done in western society for quite a long time. By definition, gays can not complete the transaction. Although I think this is a fairly weak
arguement, it is never the less true to form.
3. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children because straight parents only raise straight children.
The topic of children is almost a whole arguement althogether. But the brief points are as follows. It's is not the gay child people are
concerned about. It is the fact that children raised in gay house holds are more readily having sex. They are concerned about a more "loose"
lifestyle which they believe propagates the problem. I do not really see it that way, but I am reserving judgement on this category until I can get
more information from informed and fair sources (better studies, etc)
4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney Spears's 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.
This is a fallacy that seems prevelent these days. Justify wrong with wrong. While I agree that lately hetrosexual marriage is not as cohesive as
it used to be, and divorce is ramant, this is by no means a justification for gay marriage. To you, that would be like saying, if divorce rates were
very good, then gay should not have the right to marry. They are not related except in the increase in self serving people (but that hits almost
every problem in America).
5. 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
Marriage is not the thing that has changed. It is moreso the laws surrounding it, and the view of it. Women were never meant to be property
according to the Christian model of marriage. Because the man is the head does not mean the woman is less of a person. Same goes for blacks and
whites. It has nothing to do with marriage, but rather the inequities built into society at the time. Aside from that marriage, during these periods
was a strengthening aspect to the country.
6. 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.
There is a serious difference between the judges being honest and fair conceding only to the law as it exsists, and being an activist judge (which
mind you a good many have even claimed to be). Activist judges say to hell with the law, we will interprit it how we want so as to change public
policy. This is not uniformly true, and there are cases to be made in States that have ambiguous laws, but the intent of the law must also be
7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are always imposed on the entire country. That's
why we only have one religion in America.
You can not impose your view on someone who is not prescribing to what you are selling. Marriage is a religious element that has taken a
governmental dynamic. The only thing entitled to them under the law, is the rights associated with that dynamic.
8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people makes you tall.
I feel sorry for anyone who really believes this stuff. They are mostly old wrinked idiots who fight to keep the world in the 1950's vision they
remember. Pearls while vacuuming ladies?
9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal
standing and can sign a marriage license.
This is taken to extreme, but the underlying principle seems to be true and a case could be made for it. For homosexuals to be able to be married,
we would have to allow one "alternative lifestyle" into the fold. Now much as it would be rediculous to allow blacks to vote (although race is a
different thing in my opinion) there would be no justification to disallow asians. It could lead us down a slippery slope. This can not be proven
though, as there really is no true working model to go from. Strictly conjecture either way.
10. Children can never succeed without both male and female role models at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.
No one, I repeat no one that I have ever heard, says that a good mother and father combo is NOT as good as any other. Having a good mother and
father is the best a kid can get. Being raised by either the mother or that father is a draw back for most kdis and only serves to worsen the
11. 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
I don't know where they got this. I have never even heard the arguement before.
12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as
marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for
African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages will for gays & lesbians.
There is a serious difference in public education (specifically originated and provided by the government) and marriage, which is a religious
coupling that was seen as stabilizing as was given certain breaks. They can not be seperate from something they can not be a part of. Considering
that religions across the country would not marry homosexuals, then they do not apply to the term marriage. They are however entitled to the rights
and priviledges extended by the government alone. If it is recognition they seek (which I believe it is), then they are going about it the wrong
Phew. All done.