A Reasonable Solution To The Gay Marriage Debate

[WinterBorn]

Try an "adoption" contract.

And in most states, an unmarried couple cannot both adopt a child. The child must be adopted by one or the other. And if that person dies, the other member of the couple has no legal rights.

There are benefits to being married that cannot be gained by legal contracts. Also, the fact that every couple who gets a marriage licence and goes to the courthouse gets these benefits. You want gay couples to go to an expensive lawyer to be able to get most of them?

The "gay couples" want to live their lives differently? Yes, I believe there should be more expenses involved. If the adoptive parent sets the other person as guardian, they would have legal rights.
There are benefits to marriage that cannot be gained by having a false marriage. If you want to have that, you choose the right person of the opposite sex, and you too, can have all the benefits of marriage. Because you do not want a person of the opposite sex does not mean there is anything wrong with the institution of marriage. It means that you choose to go against societal norms, and want a pity party because things aren't going your way.


"I fought the law, and the law won".... the same with the world, if you fight the world, you are going to get bruises.

The idea of gay marriage is not taking anything away from marriage, but adding to it.

But I see what you are saying. We'll change the laws and get back to you. Its coming.

 

[logical4u]

And in most states, an unmarried couple cannot both adopt a child. The child must be adopted by one or the other. And if that person dies, the other member of the couple has no legal rights.

There are benefits to being married that cannot be gained by legal contracts. Also, the fact that every couple who gets a marriage licence and goes to the courthouse gets these benefits. You want gay couples to go to an expensive lawyer to be able to get most of them?

The "gay couples" want to live their lives differently? Yes, I believe there should be more expenses involved. If the adoptive parent sets the other person as guardian, they would have legal rights.
There are benefits to marriage that cannot be gained by having a false marriage. If you want to have that, you choose the right person of the opposite sex, and you too, can have all the benefits of marriage. Because you do not want a person of the opposite sex does not mean there is anything wrong with the institution of marriage. It means that you choose to go against societal norms, and want a pity party because things aren't going your way.


"I fought the law, and the law won".... the same with the world, if you fight the world, you are going to get bruises.

The idea of gay marriage is not taking anything away from marriage, but adding to it.

But I see what you are saying. We'll change the laws and get back to you. Its coming.

"The idea of gay marriage is not taking anything away from marriage, but adding to it."... Is this like having a great drink, and "adding" water... to make it "more"? Homosexual marriage will do nothing to make heterosexual marriage better. It will make marriage less.

 

[WinterBorn]

The "gay couples" want to live their lives differently? Yes, I believe there should be more expenses involved. If the adoptive parent sets the other person as guardian, they would have legal rights.
There are benefits to marriage that cannot be gained by having a false marriage. If you want to have that, you choose the right person of the opposite sex, and you too, can have all the benefits of marriage. Because you do not want a person of the opposite sex does not mean there is anything wrong with the institution of marriage. It means that you choose to go against societal norms, and want a pity party because things aren't going your way.


"I fought the law, and the law won".... the same with the world, if you fight the world, you are going to get bruises.

The idea of gay marriage is not taking anything away from marriage, but adding to it.

But I see what you are saying. We'll change the laws and get back to you. Its coming.

"The idea of gay marriage is not taking anything away from marriage, but adding to it."... Is this like having a great drink, and "adding" water... to make it "more"? Homosexual marriage will do nothing to make heterosexual marriage better. It will make marriage less.

How will it make it less? And please be specific.

 

[BDBoop]

 

[Vidi]

The "gay couples" want to live their lives differently? Yes, I believe there should be more expenses involved. If the adoptive parent sets the other person as guardian, they would have legal rights.
There are benefits to marriage that cannot be gained by having a false marriage. If you want to have that, you choose the right person of the opposite sex, and you too, can have all the benefits of marriage. Because you do not want a person of the opposite sex does not mean there is anything wrong with the institution of marriage. It means that you choose to go against societal norms, and want a pity party because things aren't going your way.


"I fought the law, and the law won".... the same with the world, if you fight the world, you are going to get bruises.

The idea of gay marriage is not taking anything away from marriage, but adding to it.

But I see what you are saying. We'll change the laws and get back to you. Its coming.

"The idea of gay marriage is not taking anything away from marriage, but adding to it."... Is this like having a great drink, and "adding" water... to make it "more"? Homosexual marriage will do nothing to make heterosexual marriage better. It will make marriage less.

Both are nonsense. Gay marriage will neither take away or add anything to marriage.

It will however put our money were our mouths are in terms of the 14th amendment and equal protection under the law.

 

[Vidi]

This is true. Likewise, heteros cannot marry a person of the same sex.

They have the exact same rights as we do already.

And since my sister wants to marry her partner of 20 years, and their best friends are men who have been together even longer, - and they cannot wed?

No. They DON'T 'have the same rights.' They cannot marry the person who is free to marry them, simply because they are "the wrong gender."

That is life. Just because you "WANT" to marry someone does not make it right. Children "want" to marry their parents when they are young. It does not make it right.

So your determination of what is right and wrong is the gauge for all the rest of us?

Why do you hate freedom and liberty?

 

[BDBoop]

And since my sister wants to marry her partner of 20 years, and their best friends are men who have been together even longer, - and they cannot wed?

No. They DON'T 'have the same rights.' They cannot marry the person who is free to marry them, simply because they are "the wrong gender."

That is life. Just because you "WANT" to marry someone does not make it right. Children "want" to marry their parents when they are young. It does not make it right.

So your determination of what is right and wrong is the gauge for all the rest of us?

Why do you hate freedom and liberty?

Also, SHE wanted to marry her parents when she was young.

Eww.

 

[koshergrl]

It will make marriage less the same way that no-fault divorce has made it less. By marginalizing it, by changing the status and the meaning of the one construct we KNOW is the best one for raising children.

We were told that no-fault divorce would make marriage *stronger* somehow, by making it easier to get out of, by lessening the bond, by making promiscuity less of a stigma and by making it easier to be promiscuous and jump from partner to partner.

Homosexual marriage is just more of the same...forcing us to accept and condone promiscuity and depravity by forcing us to grant it the exact same status as we grant hetero marriage, which is proven to be the ideal.

 

[garyganu]

I realize I'm showing up late in this thread but here's the reasonable solution as I see it.

"Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's"


Marriage is both a religious rite and a government recognized contract.

Therefore, gays should be able to legally marry and be recognized legally, but the churches should be able to refuse to perform the ceremonies.

Gays CAN already legally marry in every state in the union. The gay activists are trying to redefine the word marriage to include same-sex couples. Most people object to altering the institution of marriage. However, I have no objection to unions between same sex couples under a different name. Garriage for example. This way the institution of marriage does not need to be altered to accommodate gays.

Marriage is a LEGAL contract with the state.

What you're advocating is a "seperate but equal" legal status for same sex marriage. All laws regarding the rights and privileges of married status would then have to be rewritten , reargued, revoted into law.

What you're advocating in a big government bureaucratic nightmare that wastes time and taxpayer money implementing something that could be done with a single piece of legislation that simply defines marriage as two consenting adults.

Why?

Gay's are different from straights just as men are different from women. Therefore, men and women are not equal and gays and straights are not equal. We are different. Different things are not equal by definition.

Here is a good article about why gay marriage is detrimental to our society: Articles: Gay Marriage: The Hidden Agenda

 

[garyganu]

But why is gay marriage inimical to the traditional matrimony? How does society suffer if it gives legal sanction to the cohabitation of gay couples and bestows upon them the rights traditionally granted to spouses? In short, an approach based on individual rights is a bum steer. Legalization of same-sex marriage compromises the institution of marriage and thus undermines the family built on the foundation of marriage.

It has been known since the dawn of history that a family unit consisting of a man and a woman is the best nurturing environment for the children. According to the research center Child Trends, "[r]esearch confirms that children develop best in families formed by both biological parents in a low-conflict marriage." Even the best-intentioned gay couples raising children shortchange their wards. But the most militant gay leaders are not well-meaning. Just as the radical leftists started out on their Great March through the Institutions with schools and colleges as their primary targets ("We'll get you through your children," the radical leftist and gay poet Allen Ginsberg warned his erstwhile friend Norman Podhoretz), gay militants have children in their cross-hairs. A nationwide organization, The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, openly acknowledges that its objective is to promote a positive view of homosexuality among pre-teen and teenage students.

Aside from the tremendous damage same-sex marriage does to the well-being and normal development of children, by offering an alternative to a bedrock institution, gay marriage calls into question all traditional values. There is a strong correlation between the rise of homosexual marriage and the weakening of traditional matrimony. David Blankenhorn observes, "The deep logic of same-sex marriage is clearly consistent with what scholars call deinstitutionalization -- the overturning or weakening of all of the customary forms of marriage, and the dramatic shrinking of marriage's public meaning and institutional authority. Does deinstitutionalization necessarily require gay marriage? Apparently not. For decades heterosexuals have been doing a fine job on that front all by themselves. But gay marriage clearly presupposes and reinforces deinstitutionalization."

Marx's loyal cohort Friedrich Engels, in his influential work, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the States, disclosed the game plan in a single, succinct proposition: change the concept of matrimony, and the traditional family will cease to exist. And once the family is gone, society will fall apart. Knock out the cornerstone, and the whole edifice will crumble, which is precisely the ultimate goal of the revolutionary movement.

Read more:

Nonsense.

With a 40-50% divorce rate ( depending on who puts out the numbers ) arguing the "sanctity" of marriage is a strawman argument.

There are many "fronts" attacking the institution of marriage. The gay agenda is definately one of them.

 

[garyganu]

The idea of gay marriage is not taking anything away from marriage, but adding to it.

But I see what you are saying. We'll change the laws and get back to you. Its coming.

"The idea of gay marriage is not taking anything away from marriage, but adding to it."... Is this like having a great drink, and "adding" water... to make it "more"? Homosexual marriage will do nothing to make heterosexual marriage better. It will make marriage less.

How will it make it less? And please be specific.

Winterborn, Here is a good article that explains the societal dangers of gay marriage: Articles: Gay Marriage: The Hidden Agenda

 

[BDBoop]

 

[garyganu]

Gay and liberal activists are INTOLERANT BIGOTS. People opposed to gay marriage don't hate anyone.

 

[garyganu]

It will make marriage less the same way that no-fault divorce has made it less. By marginalizing it, by changing the status and the meaning of the one construct we KNOW is the best one for raising children.

We were told that no-fault divorce would make marriage *stronger* somehow, by making it easier to get out of, by lessening the bond, by making promiscuity less of a stigma and by making it easier to be promiscuous and jump from partner to partner.

Homosexual marriage is just more of the same...forcing us to accept and condone promiscuity and depravity by forcing us to grant it the exact same status as we grant hetero marriage, which is proven to be the ideal.

Great comment koshergrl. Did I inspire the part about no-fault divorce with my other posts?

 

[WinterBorn]

"The idea of gay marriage is not taking anything away from marriage, but adding to it."... Is this like having a great drink, and "adding" water... to make it "more"? Homosexual marriage will do nothing to make heterosexual marriage better. It will make marriage less.

How will it make it less? And please be specific.

Winterborn, Here is a good article that explains the societal dangers of gay marriage: Articles: Gay Marriage: The Hidden Agenda

Ok, I found a few lines in the article that are obviously BS.

"Not a single society in the long history of mankind has ever attempted to substitute homosexual relationships for traditional marriage." No one is substituting gay relationships for marriage.

"Radical movements are merely battalions of the revolutionary army, each charged with a particular subversive task. Undoubtedly, the overwhelming majority of rank-and-file gays are well-meaning people who have sincerely bought into the myth peddled by their leaders that the marriage license is the ultimate token of recognition of their normalcy. They know not what they are doing. But the wizards behind the curtain know better, and there shouldn't be any illusions about their intentions: they want nothing less than to bring down the capitalist system, and they view their movement as a battering ram to shatter its principal bastion, America. Bringing down the traditional family is a crucial step in that direction."

So its all a plot to destroy America? And even most of the gays involved are unaware of the plot? lol How does that tinfoil hat fit?



The entire article continues the "Marriage has always been..." and "it will destroy the institution of marriage" arguments. Still vague answers and nonsense.

As for the nonsense, "Aside from the tremendous damage same-sex marriage does to the well-being and normal development of children..."

from: Study: Same-Sex Parents Raise Well-Adjusted Kids

"Researchers looked at information gleaned from 15 studies on more than 500 children, evaluating possible stigma, teasing and social isolation, adjustment and self-esteem, opposite gender role models, sexual orientation, and strengths.

Studies from 1981 to 1994, including 260 children reared by either heterosexual mothers or same-sex mothers after divorce, found no differences in intelligence, type or prevalence of psychiatric disorders, self-esteem, well-being, peer relationships, couple relationships, or parental stress.

"Some studies showed that single heterosexual parents' children have more difficulties than children who have parents of the same sex," Perrin says. "They did better in discipline, self-esteem, and had less psychosocial difficulties at home and at school."

Another study of 37 children of 27 divorced lesbian mothers and a similar number of children of heterosexual mothers found no differences in behavior, adjustment, gender identity, and peer relationships."



from: Children with Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Parents | American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry

"Sometimes people are concerned that children being raised by a gay parent will need extra emotional support or face unique social stressors.Current research shows that children with gay and lesbian parents do not differ from children with heterosexual parents in their emotional development or in their relationships with peers and adults. It is important for parents to understand that it is the the quality of the parent/child relationship and not the parent’s sexual orientation that has an effect on a child’s development.


Children raised by gay couples show good progress through school

Same-sex couples can be effective parents, researchers find - USATODAY.com



So the arguments that it is tremendously damaging to the well-being and normal development of children are bunk. That leaves the same old "It will destroy marriage" and "They are out to destroy America" arguments.

Just one anecdotal piece of evidence. My 3 kids from my first marriage lived with my ex and her partner for about half of their lives. I was very involved, but my work requires travel. All three exhibit some similar characteristics. None of them were ever disciplinary problems (2 were never sent to the principal's office). All 3 graduated with honors from high school, one of them with a GPA of 4.28. All three graduated from a major university, one of them with more honors than I can list. All 3 have had serious relationships with the opposite gender (one is engaged, one is in a long-term relationship). In short, they are as close to perfect kids as you can ask for.

 

[WinterBorn]

It will make marriage less the same way that no-fault divorce has made it less. By marginalizing it, by changing the status and the meaning of the one construct we KNOW is the best one for raising children.

We were told that no-fault divorce would make marriage *stronger* somehow, by making it easier to get out of, by lessening the bond, by making promiscuity less of a stigma and by making it easier to be promiscuous and jump from partner to partner.

Homosexual marriage is just more of the same...forcing us to accept and condone promiscuity and depravity by forcing us to grant it the exact same status as we grant hetero marriage, which is proven to be the ideal.

The No-Fault Divorce law didn't do anything. It is the couples involved, and their lack of committment that did any damage.

BTW, gay marriage certainly doesn't force anyone to accept and condone promiscuity. In fact, it does quite the opposite.

 

[garyganu]

It will make marriage less the same way that no-fault divorce has made it less. By marginalizing it, by changing the status and the meaning of the one construct we KNOW is the best one for raising children.

We were told that no-fault divorce would make marriage *stronger* somehow, by making it easier to get out of, by lessening the bond, by making promiscuity less of a stigma and by making it easier to be promiscuous and jump from partner to partner.

Homosexual marriage is just more of the same...forcing us to accept and condone promiscuity and depravity by forcing us to grant it the exact same status as we grant hetero marriage, which is proven to be the ideal.

The No-Fault Divorce law didn't do anything. It is the couples involved, and their lack of committment that did any damage.

BTW, gay marriage certainly doesn't force anyone to accept and condone promiscuity. In fact, it does quite the opposite.

Most gay men DO accept infidelity as a "normal" part of their relationship.

 

[WinterBorn]

It will make marriage less the same way that no-fault divorce has made it less. By marginalizing it, by changing the status and the meaning of the one construct we KNOW is the best one for raising children.

We were told that no-fault divorce would make marriage *stronger* somehow, by making it easier to get out of, by lessening the bond, by making promiscuity less of a stigma and by making it easier to be promiscuous and jump from partner to partner.

Homosexual marriage is just more of the same...forcing us to accept and condone promiscuity and depravity by forcing us to grant it the exact same status as we grant hetero marriage, which is proven to be the ideal.

The No-Fault Divorce law didn't do anything. It is the couples involved, and their lack of committment that did any damage.

BTW, gay marriage certainly doesn't force anyone to accept and condone promiscuity. In fact, it does quite the opposite.

Most gay men DO accept infidelity as a "normal" part of their relationship.

If both partners in the relationship accept it, why is it any of our business?

There are straight swingers who also practice non-monogamous marriages. In fact, there are estimates of as many as 1.5 million people who are swingers. If both partners know about it and are ok with it, why should anyone else worry about it? Its none of our business.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Winterborn, Here is a good article that explains the societal dangers of gay marriage: Articles: Gay Marriage: The Hidden Agenda

A subjective opinion piece from a rightist blog does not constitute objective, substantiated evidence.

 

[logical4u]

The idea of gay marriage is not taking anything away from marriage, but adding to it.

But I see what you are saying. We'll change the laws and get back to you. Its coming.

"The idea of gay marriage is not taking anything away from marriage, but adding to it."... Is this like having a great drink, and "adding" water... to make it "more"? Homosexual marriage will do nothing to make heterosexual marriage better. It will make marriage less.

How will it make it less? And please be specific.

Marriage (in this country) is a legal, binding contract that goes beyond a piece of paper to family and community. Marriage builds families, communities, cities, states, and countries. Homosexual marriage is about two people that do not care about their families, communities, cities, states or countries until after they get what they want. Them forcing the change of definition is to LEGALLY state that what they are doing is not wrong. According to the major religions, it is wrong. This way, they force their beliefs onto others and marriage becomes two people with a contract, a legal agreement, nothing more. It is no longer about building families and communities. It is a tool to take from gov't programs. Their children are taken from others (adoption) or the opposite sex (that they cannot stand) is USED to get the part it takes to make a child.
All children go thru stages of wondering about how they came to be, can you imagine the mental damage: Yeah my parent is homosexual. They hate the opposite sex. I was mastrubated into a cup and put in a turkey baster so the opposite sex did not have to be "touched". I wonder how long that cup or turkey baster was sitting out, and if I would have been different if two people that loved each other had wanted to have a child and so had sex. My parent says they love me, but all they talk about is how their sexual preference comes before everything and everybody...
It is really easy to close your eyes and imagine everything will be okay when you go against long held traditions. Recent history is full of events where people put their "faith" in men: nazis, Lenin, Mao, Pol pot, Fidel, Chavez, etc, etc, etc. Before you destroy the society we live in, consider the history of going against traditional marriage. All those mentioned and more, first worked to break the traditional family. People without family and without a moral compass (their faith) are much easier to manipulate (homosexuals included). Saying that marriage will not be affected is ignorant. Once you start down that path, history has shown where it leads (to a total stain). Fraud (homosexual marriage) only corrupts. It corrupts those involved and they spread the corruption throughout their community, city, state, country. If you want to embrace corruption, there are plenty of places where it is rampant, why don't you go live there for a while and make sure that is how you want this country to be, before you start destroying the moral foundation of society.