Most of us do - now. But what of the teens debating it in schools ...
Homosexuals equate a license with forced societal acceptance of their unions that will gradually be fully accepted. In my opinions homosexual orientation is just one of those things. It's not normal, but I wouldn't use the word aberration. Many of us have something or other wrong with us. It is unfortunate for those who find themselves to be homosexual - their life may well be less fulfilled because of it. I expect such a person to pursue happiness, and couple responsibly.
Legal unions or marriages that carry rights and benefits are a completely different animal. I am strongly opposed to that. We need to educate our children about what marriage is really for and why it is a union of one man and one woman.
I agree with you and I have said this myself, but in my haste I did not add that on. But I do think there is a vast difference between the militant you-must-like-and-accept-my-actions variety and the regular person struggling with our own uniquenesses like the rest of us. Just as hetero marriage is threatened, if you will, by those who are routinely unfaithful or have open marriages, so too is a homosexual union threatened by militants who want to marry more to make a point than anything else. Those same homosexual regular folks have their own legitimacy stained by the actions of their militant counterparts. Not that I believe homosexual marriage should be a right or legal, but I see the point of certain legal issues being resolved for long-term couples. And I don't believe that the couples rushed through this week, judging by their own words, are indicative of what many homosexual couples want nor are they treating this 'right' they've fought for with the importance it used to receive and still should. After all, they really need to succeed. If they fall into the same divorce rates and ills as the regular marriages they routinely scorn supposedly have, they are very blatantly contradicting themselves. The very militant have been vilifying 'breeder' divorce rates for some time.
Legal unions or marriages that carry rights and benefits are a completely different animal. I am strongly opposed to that. We need to educate our children about what marriage is really for and why it is a union of one man and one woman.
These are good points. It seems as though we need to educate a lot of people on the importance of marriage and what it is for and what it means to make such a commitment and why it is uniquely suited to one man and one woman. Too few of us are doing that. And a lot of people are doing much to the contrary. I remain concerned for this generation of kids - their understanding of marriage is skewed by the homosexual agenda in schools and the soaring divorce rates among their parents. I think many of us on this forum are doing our part, but it seems inadequate compared to the work of others.