"So the President isn't the only one pandering to a small group within his base. Unfortunately for those of us who believe there are serious issues facing this Nation, I'm afraid this one will play right into the hands of the Democrats this Fall.
We must never undermine the uniqueness of an institution that continues to serve as an essential thread in the fabric of our society. I support the passage of the Marriage Protection amendment being debated in the Senate," Congresswoman Harris said.
I hate to pop her bubble, but the 10 million couples living together outside of marriage and the 1 million divorces a year pose an infinitely greater danger to marriage than the piddly 6000 same sex marriages in Massachusetts. I'm trying to figure out how any of those 6000 are endangering my marriage."
You are quite right that easy divorce (promoted by liberal feminists) has led to a serious consideration of gay marriage. Easy divorce, however, has had a terrible emotional effect on children and countless adults. It has led to a disrespect for traditional marriage and has gotten us used to the concept of taking mothers or fathers away from children. Because we are accustomed to taking mothers or fathers away from children (for the sake of our terribly important adult life style preferences), gay marriage makes sense to some people. Given the terrible effect that easy divorce has had on both individuals and society, why would you add to the effect by legalizing gay marriage? How is a son supposed to learn to be a man through two lesbian parents? How is a girl going to learn to relate to men through two lesbian parents? How can two homosexuals mother a baby? Don't give me the argument about gays adopting little orphan children. The gay rights movement is not about that. What about the natural tie of kinship? There is a denial of kinship ties in gay marriage.
This divorce argument is an argument in favor of making divorce laws stricter. It is not an argument in favor of gay marriage.
But if we are to adopt a constitutional amendment to protect the institution of marriage, this does not do that. No heterosexual is going to consider which type of marriage to engage in, same sex or traditional. Therefore, if traditional marriages decline in this Country, it cannot be linked to gay marriages.
Because we are accustomed to taking mothers or fathers away from children (for the sake of our terribly important adult life style preferences), gay marriage makes sense to some people.
I cannot see any linkage here between people opting for gay marriage (in place of what?), and the separation of children from their natural parents. I may be missing your point.
Given the terrible effect that easy divorce has had on both individuals and society, why would you add to the effect by legalizing gay marriage?
First I do not want to legalize gay marriages in my state. I have no say on any family law issues in any other state. Second this amendment is being sold under false pretenses. It is not intended to stop gay marriage, but only where a judge rules the state constitution does not so permit. This is wrong, as the state constitution only needs to be amended to cure the problem.
How is a son supposed to learn to be a man through two lesbian parents?
This is an entirely different situation than gay marriage. Adoption bans have been found legal all the way to the USSC. If a state wants, however to permit same sex adoptions, again, that is their business, not mine. Even without same sex marriages, adoptions must be considered by the state since heterosexual unmarried couples and singles routinely adopt in many states. Nor will the FMA even touch on this issue.
Don't give me the argument about gays adopting little orphan children. The gay rights movement is not about that
Again, that is up to the state. But the statistics show that 40 thousand children a year go unadopted. Child abuse has been shown to occur far more often in those institutions substituting for a permanent home than they do with adoptees. Most couples want infants, so that the older child often goes through the foster system for years before finding a permanent home, if ever. Most monogamous same sex couples have the same desires to treat their adopted children with love and caring as heterosexual couples do. There is no credible evidence to the contrary. The gay rights movement may deserve criticism for their tactics and some of their goals, but most gays and lesbians claim not to be part of anything other than their desire to be productive assets to their community.
There is a denial of kinship ties in gay marriage.
I'm not quite sure what you meant by this.
To summarize, the statistics you are referring to are meaningful. The ten million couples living out of the state of marriage and the one million divorces directly and materially have a negative impact on marriage. The 6000 same sex marriages have no such link. We may not like them, nor do I even understand the causes of it or why people are so inclined. But I can find absolutely no identified harm that is done to traditional marriage.