I knew a married straight couple once who were childless. Then the wife fell seriously ill. Her husband took care of her and kept the household running, so she could stay at home till she recovered. Without him she would certainly have been institutionalized indefinitely, a lonely patient, which would have not been as good for her. You can easily envision a similar scenario for a gay or lesbian couple.

And there’s also the fact that permanently bonded, faithful couples are unlikely to catch STDs. Promiscuity enormously increases the risk of catching an STD.

I don’t understand why some folks think it’s in society’s interest to promote commitment, sharing and bonding for straight adults, but it’s just fine if gays are single, lonely and promiscuous. Unless they just don’t want gays to be gay. I suspect that’s the case.

http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/07/pro-life-pro-gay-marriage/

What a vile and despicable comparison. As if two adults of the same gender wanting to marry is the same as pedophilia. Of course, we should expect such logic from the same warped mind that thinks that a bunch of traitorous losers from the 1860s were really just misunderstood and misrepresented patriots.

“Beyond any doubt” is where you go astray.

Some studies show that children raised by two same-sex parents do as well as those raised by opposite-sex parents. So it is in society’s best interest for the government to promote these kinds of families as well.

Even for couples without children, it’s in society’s best interest to promote mutual commitment. It provides a buffer when one partner is briefly unable to work, or needs care. A married person can turn first to a spouse when times get tough, instead of to the public. When my brother was laid off earlier this year, his wife went to work full time (instead of part time) until he could find another job.

No, that isn’t the case. But the main reason government should even be involved in marriage is because the family unit is the backbone of any society. Granted not all straight couples will have children. But we know beyond any doubt that the best environment for children is a family consisting of one father and one mother. It is in society’s best interest for government policy to strengthen this type of family structure.

The gay agenda has become about trying to get society to accept homosexual couples as an equal to heterosexual couples. We all know that is not valid. Again, people should have the right to enter into gay relationships but that should never be seen as an equal to one man and one woman entering into marriage.

No.

But despite this, we’ve created a myriad of laws around civil marriage that deal with taxation (filing joint returns), estate planning, inheritance, hospital visitation rights, divorce, community property settlement, etc.

Currently, gays are excluded from this. I don’t believe a gay couple can file a joint tax return and take advantage of joint return tax rates, for example.

Gay couples are simply demanding the right to be treated by the law exactly as straight couples are treated. You must admit that right now, that isn’t the case.

You may claim that my marriage interferes with your freedom to stop me from being married, but that’s a losing proposition. Your connection to my marriage is virtually nonexistent, and the two people who are involved are consenting adults. Our freedom to marry trumps your freedom to prevent us from marrying.

There are obvious reasons why this does not apply to your freedom to marry a six-year-old. The six-year-old cannot legally consent to the marriage.

Theocracies, such as those controlled by Islam, will be the last to accept same-sex marriage. And the last to give up cultural horrors such as honor killings and marrying children.

So now that we are just arguing whose morality should be imposed upon society….and specifically not one group seeking to impose its morality over other peoples freedom, but rather multiple groups seeking to impose their morality on other people and their freedom.

Glad we cleared that up.