MARRIAGE AS THE PLACE TO HAVE CHILDREN: Mark Miller

I don't doubt at all that there are abusive and irresponsible same sex couples. There are also abusive and irresponsible opposite sex couples. Those are 'individual cases'. The individual cases you referred to in my post are not individual indeed. They are examples of arrangements where marriage is a legal option yet not in the best interests of children. The argument against same sex marriage on the grounds that children need mothers and fathers is hollow. If that were your real concern, you could support same-sex marriage or civil unions but be against adoptions by anyone other married couples.

Regarding a couple of other posts, the post of the William Bennett article was very interesting. While I do not agree with it, I find it intellectually honest. This debate is all about normalizing homosexuality. It is not about marriage. If same-sex relationship were given any legal status, that would mean that the government is accepting of gay relationships, thus normalizing them - just as the Lawrence decision does for homosexual acts. As I've said before and I still believe it, the fear is not that the acceptance of same sex relationships will doom the institution of marriage. The fear is that they will not. And that may lead to the further acceptance of gay relationships.

Finally, Michael Triplett has it exactly right. The younger generation appears to understand that traditional morality can encompass gays and lesbians. Therefore, they don't see the connection you are trying to make between ones personal values and stigmatizing gays and gay relationships.
posted by maggie at 9:31 AM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home