That post was very disturbing, DocFrance.
No legal basis? How about discrimination due to gender? That's the only reason they're not being allowed, because they're not the "right" gender. Biological basis has no place in the courtroom.
And actually, I can think of TONS of cultures that approve, and practice homosexuality. More than those who shun it. And biologically? That can already be disproved by saying that we don't follow our base instincts. We're beyond that.
A same sex couple is just like a heterosexual couple who won't/can't have children. The legalities between the couple and their adopted child would be the same as if it were any other married couple. The only difference would be the sex of one partner. Denying them any of these rights based on their sex is discrimination.
Marriage is a right, not a privilege only given to those who meet your own personal moral standard. No, you're definitely not a racist, but your attitudes are the same. Why does it matter about the gender of one partner? Do you think they can't truly love each other? Is that even a requirement of marriage? You can't possibly measure that, so that's out. Is it because they can't procreate? What about people who are impotent or infertile? Because they have the hardware that could've worked is irrelevant. So what if taxes change? Money is why you're limiting these people's rights? This is a tired, tired arguement, always made by closed minded people. It's the same thing they argued about when interracial couples started happening, which I should hope seems like a ridiculous one now. Yet, the same attitudes prevail. It's sad.
Marriage doesn't presume anything about children. I suppose maybe that's a tradition, and sure, if you want to continue that, that's fine. I don't see why it gives you the right to say who is fit to be a parent based on only gender. If the man were with a woman, he'd be a fit parent, but because he's with another man, he's not? What kind of logic is that? I don't understand it.
History is also not a very good point. That's so completely self centered. Your culture, one that shuns homosexuality, is better than those that embrace it? That's one of the ways that the union was formed. One. Just because it's the one in this country doesn't make it universally right, it doesn't make it legally valid at all, and it certainly doesn't make you any better than other cultures who developed differently, especially in such a slight difference, like gender.
I consider this a social evolution. The recognition that we shouldn't define people's lives for them. Women are no longer bound to be house wives, minorities aren't discriminated against, and homosexual marriage is being legalized. Already is in many places.
And the bible contains truth? It also contains some really awful, awful stuff. Yay, slavery. But let's not argue about that. Yes, it does have some words of wisdom. Again though, this is legally irrelevant.
Maybe marriage has always been between a man and a women in western society, but again, that's not universal.
"THAT RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN AND ALWAYS WILL BE UNIQUE!!!!!!! And no OTHER set of human relationships, genetic or voluntary – man or woman and neighbor, aunt, uncle, teen nephew, niece, acquaintance, grandparents, greatgrandparasts, 3d cousins – is, or can be included by ‘marriage.’"
Why? Please answer why without using any of the reasons I've discounted above. How is it not gender discrimination? I see why it's against your morals, but your morals aren't the issue here. Your morals don't have to apply to every other person's relationships. And they shouldn't. It's not your relationship, it's not your partner, it's not your family, it's not your life. Why is the gender of someone's partner ANY business of yours? You want to preserve the santity of marriage? Fine, marry a girl, raise a family. That doesn't mean that everyone in the world should follow in your footsteps, even if you think it would be better for them, or the world. You don't have any valid legal, or social reason for thinking that. And I mean actual negative implications.
