“More” for Marriage Obama Style
The truth is that marriage benefits the whole of society. Therefore a wise society and an effective government protects the institution of marriage, seeks to strengthen marriage with favorable public policies in return for the service that marriage renders to the whole of society. (Bears, raises and educated the next generation of citizens) To permit marriages certain legal protections is not to discriminate against anyone. Rather, it is to encourage the institution that is the fundamental building block of society.
Homosexuals are free to marry under the same legal parameters as heterosexuals–it is just that they choose not to. Okay, their decision is to follow an “alternate lifestyle.” But this does not logically lead to a “right” to redefine marriage.
Here is the argument that same-sex pairs make:
“We are committed and we feel that society should recognize our commitment and privilege it as marriage is privileged–our love and affection are no less than yours. Our love and commitment deserve privileges too.”
The is fuzzy logic based on emoting not thinking.
Affection and commitment do not equal marriage. Two sisters sharing an apartment love each other and are committed to each other’s best interests–but that ’s not marriage.
A college kid and his dog are committed and love each other. That’s not marriage.
The implication is that a sexual relationship, wherein the parties intend permanence, equals marriage. If that is the criteria, an incestuous brother sister relationship could be defined as marriage.
Another problem: The polygamy lobby has correctly inferred that if same-sex pairs can force society to redefine the contents of marriage based on their preferences then so can polygamists. Sound far-fetched? Not at all. Such is the case now in Holland. The legal union of three persons is permitted in Holland–how long before the three is stretched to four or ten?
If a group of people can form a lobby and influence a significant political percentage of the population, are they free to redefine fundamental human institutions according to their whim?
If two lesbians can declare that their preferences, their choices, are as valid as any other group’s choices, then ho are they going to respond to pedophiles who make the same claim?
For the record the Human Genome project found that there is no such thing as a “gay gene,” and God did not create homosexual DNA codes. Same-sex attraction is a behavioral symptom of a deeper disconnect. (It is beyond the scope to cover that topic in this post. Medical info is here)
The truth is that whenever we tinker with the given order of things we unleash waves of human misery.
What to do? Work to pass a marriage amendment in your state. Teach your children why marriage is not a fluid concept. Defend the created order.
Keep the faith!
