It is unfortunate that this comment is flamebait. It really only has one major derogatory ignorant statement, specifically:
Homosexuals simply do not display the same pattern of behavior
Other than that, the comment pretty much just rehashes that basic assumptions pushed by christianity in hope the may become fact.
So I will respond with the standard counter arguments. Marriage is an acknowledgment of the importance of fidelity and family values. The issue is whether the primary goal is fidelity or family values. Currently, the administration wants it to the fidelity, or, to be more specific, make sure that a specific man and a specific women have sex with each other, and not with other people. This is a laudable goal. Heterosexual monogamous relationships have their place, and providing a system that supports them is good.
On the other hand we have family, which we take to mean caring for children. This is an activity done by primarily at least one person, and, if we invoke the your thousands of years of history, preferable a village. The stability of the family unit is important because that stability usually creates a better adult. Furthermore, the focus is no longer on who is having sex with whom, but on whether the child has adequate parents. If we look at history once again, we find that genetic studies that indicate a significant number of babies were conceived outside of the marital bond, yet the father still took care of those children.
What irks me is that so many people approach marriage as a selfish institution in which they have someone to take of them, they have someone to fuck regularly, they have someone to talk about as 'theirs' at cocktail parties, rather than an institution to create the adults we need for the survival of humanity and our culture. In this sense marriage is just legalized fucking, which as I said has it benefits, rather than an acknowledgment of the critically important work of raising children.
We see this philosophy in current Washington policy. Some much effort was used to alleviate the so-call marriage penalty, rather than using that money to help with child rearing. I mean who cares if a married couple has to pay more taxes? Unless marriage is just legalized fucking, make them have a kid to get the tax breaks.
We see this philosophy in heterosexual couples in the US who can't have kids. The white ones want white kids and go to Eastern Europe to steal them while leaving reasonable healthy non-white US kids to suffer in foster homes and orphanages. What kind of family value is that? I can only love children who look like me? OTOH, we have homosexual couples with enough love in their heat to help a child in need and take in the black or brown child that has been left by the white couple. Now tell me, which couple is promoting family values?
Slashdot Mirror
Homosexuals simply do not display the same pattern of behavior
Other than that, the comment pretty much just rehashes that basic assumptions pushed by christianity in hope the may become fact.
So I will respond with the standard counter arguments. Marriage is an acknowledgment of the importance of fidelity and family values. The issue is whether the primary goal is fidelity or family values. Currently, the administration wants it to the fidelity, or, to be more specific, make sure that a specific man and a specific women have sex with each other, and not with other people. This is a laudable goal. Heterosexual monogamous relationships have their place, and providing a system that supports them is good.
On the other hand we have family, which we take to mean caring for children. This is an activity done by primarily at least one person, and, if we invoke the your thousands of years of history, preferable a village. The stability of the family unit is important because that stability usually creates a better adult. Furthermore, the focus is no longer on who is having sex with whom, but on whether the child has adequate parents. If we look at history once again, we find that genetic studies that indicate a significant number of babies were conceived outside of the marital bond, yet the father still took care of those children.
What irks me is that so many people approach marriage as a selfish institution in which they have someone to take of them, they have someone to fuck regularly, they have someone to talk about as 'theirs' at cocktail parties, rather than an institution to create the adults we need for the survival of humanity and our culture. In this sense marriage is just legalized fucking, which as I said has it benefits, rather than an acknowledgment of the critically important work of raising children.
We see this philosophy in current Washington policy. Some much effort was used to alleviate the so-call marriage penalty, rather than using that money to help with child rearing. I mean who cares if a married couple has to pay more taxes? Unless marriage is just legalized fucking, make them have a kid to get the tax breaks.
We see this philosophy in heterosexual couples in the US who can't have kids. The white ones want white kids and go to Eastern Europe to steal them while leaving reasonable healthy non-white US kids to suffer in foster homes and orphanages. What kind of family value is that? I can only love children who look like me? OTOH, we have homosexual couples with enough love in their heat to help a child in need and take in the black or brown child that has been left by the white couple. Now tell me, which couple is promoting family values?