Posted on 03/09/2004 11:03:15 AM PST by DameAutour
In a recent discussion concerning homosexual marriage, a conservative said "I really don't care since it doesn't impact my marriage". This comment reminded me of those who say that the solution is to "get government out of marriage altogether" or "make all marriages civil unions". They believe that the issue is one of policy and linguistic technicalities. But in reality, the social impact on our civilization is much more profound.
For homosexual marriage will effect not only your marriage, but your entire family structure. It will effect the culture and values of your community and ultimately, that of your children.
When marriage no longer means "the committed union of one man and one woman", it can come to mean virtually anything. How does that effect you? Do you say that you will know the value of your own marriage no matter what? But marriage is not just about your love. Otherwise, there would be no need to get married at all. Marriage is a public testament to your commitment. Even in the days before churches or the government were so intimately involved in marriage, witnesses were still required. Marriage has always been a public affair.
When you stand before the public and say, "I am married to this person", what will that mean?
When feelings are elevated above morality and sound reasoning, the effect can be devastating. There must be always be a balance between emotions, sound judgement and moral behavior. Emotions join people together and strengthen the social compact. Rationality promotes objectivity, debate and the logical thinking necessary to propel us forward. And objective morality keeps our actions grounded in a higher plane and our expectations elevated.
But the push to change the meaning of marriage ignores sound reasoning and antiquates societal morality. Proponents of homosexual marriage give little thought to the consequences of their actions, and this should give any conservative pause. Their morality is subjective and relative, and "feels good" means "good". If this is how the establishment of marriage is to be refashioned, what else will be sacrificed on the altar of pleasure?
Will hedonism be the most important philosophy of the new Western civilization?
Years ago, no-fault divorce and painless annulments were introduced to the American people. When Britney Spears marries and destroys a marriage in the span of a weekend, it cheapens the institution of marriage even for those who really did mean "til death do us part". Their children see that marriage is just a fun thing to do when you're in Las Vegas. Because of no-fault divorce, immorality no longer meant anything when it came to the dissolution of this committed union. Now it seems morality will mean nothing in the joining of this committed union.
When the moral weight is stripped from the fiber of your marriage, can you really say it wasn't effected?
If marriage means whatever our feelings want it to mean, how do you convey that to your children? How do you impress upon them the significance of marriage when you can't even tell them what it means because the definition keeps changing? What reasons will you give them for getting married at all, if the decisions and sacrifices they make as part of that committment won't even be acknowledged by their own government? If the neighbors to your right have a "group marriage" while the neighbors to your left have a "homosexual marriage", then what does that make your marriage? Are all unions equal in meaning and significance? And since "equal" doesn't mean "the same", what will you say when the divorce rate skyrockets as a result of "homosexual marriages" that will last an average of 2 years? How will you teach your children the true meaning of marriage when every TV commercial, school book and pamphlet will undermine it? With all the confusion will you even remember what marriage is?
If marriage loses its importance and significance, how can you say it wasn't effected?
That's funny. I thought homosexuality defined the "gay lifestyle." News flash, there is no "gay lifestyle." Certain negative things may happen more frequently with gays (which I believe is because of their former underground status), but they don't define how all gays act. You're watching too much Pat Robertson -- hint for you, he's not a good and honest person.
No. If it did, then gays would be just like heterosexuals with the exception of their choice of partners. But we know that's not the case.
"Certain negative things may happen more frequently with gays
Certain negative things DO happen more frequently with gays -- anonymous sex in rest rooms, adult bookstores, bathhouses, public parks, gay bars, etc. for starters. You may want to ask yourself why AIDS is considered a gay disease.
"but they don't define how all gays act."
No, of course not. Just the vast majority of them.
"You're watching too much Pat Robertson"
I've never watched or listened to Pat Robertson.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.