posted on May, 22 2011 @ 07:33 AM
I have no problem with civil unions and I think that they should have all the same rights as traditional marriages do. however its obvious that a
couple composed of a male and a female is not the same as a couple composed of male and male or female and female, therefore I would think that some
fine details would have to be different, much in a way that insurance for a four door family sedan is different from a v8 sports car. The dynamics of
the union, the financial outlook, etc etc are just different therefore I would think that specific details like % of tax breaks would be adjusted
Like I said I think Civil unions should have all the same rights as a traditional marriage. However, I'm against making gay marriage a synonym with
traditional marriage. If you are one of those that think civil unions with all the rights of a traditional marriage is good and don't feel the need
to make gay marriage and traditional marriage one and the same then we agree with everything and the rest of my post wont be of your interest.
when people discuss gay marriage there are two very distinct issues, one is the legal aspect discussion where people talk about rights and the other
one is when people talk about making gay "marriages" socially mainstream and the same, not equivalent, but the exact same as a traditional marriage.
My problem is with people that want to make gay marriage to be socially considered the same as a traditional marriage, and for this I have some
logical arguments against it.
Making gay "marriage" and traditional marriage socially the same will harm people. Therefore, using logic, it is a bad thing. There is no doubt
logically to say that something that harms people is bad, now the question is how would making gay "marriage" socially the same as traditional
marriage harm people.
1. people who consider marriage a holy union will be forced to admit that it is not holy. therefore causing the sacred aspect of marriage to disappear
and diluting the importance of marriage. in our current situation were only half the marriages succeed it would mean even worse successful marriage
turnouts and more broken homes. We all know that broken homes are the breeding grounds of criminals
2. it will create chaos in the religious community followed by organization splits and animosity. Although many members will sure like to see chaos in
the religious community, it is important to understand that religion is there for a reason and a healthy society needs some form of religion (I'm not
religious at all but I do see the value it has for society) and of course I not talking about extremists
3. keeping the family blood alive will be a problem. many of you wont realize this but passing on your genes and having your family tree conserved is
crucial for a healthy long lasting family. This is not just about your immediate family (ex. two dads and one son) but about cousins, uncles,
grandparents etc. all those relationships would be diluted and eventually lost. who would you be more willing to help, someone with 1/4 your blood or
and adopted member of your extended family? this will result in the eventual end of a family tree and the ones harmed would be those who hoped to
maintain their family tree alive.
4. if kids grow in a social environment were there is no distinction between gay "marriage" and traditional marriage it will one more thing parents
will have to worry about. now days parents worry about many things and adding one more worry is not helping families at all. why would parents be
worried about this? because they want to keep their family tree alive and they want their kids to have their own real offspring. I'm don't have kids
yet and I'm not even married but I would eventually want to see my real blood related grandkids. Point 3 explains why my desire to see my own blood
related grandkids is logical.
there are a couple of other points but I dont want to make this post any longer than what it is now so I will stop here.
I would like to finish with one question myself. This question is not directed to people discussing legal rights, it is aimed at people trying to
socially fusing the meaning of marriage with gay "marriage"
why do you feel the need to impose your will onto the rest and change the mainstream standard to fit your needs? why is not a civil union with all the
legal benefits enough?
if homosexuals truly believed that there is nothing wrong being a homosexual and they didnt feel ashamed about it then they would not be trying to
change the social image