This one is pretty controversial. I'll put that disclaimer out there right at the beginning. These are my own personal opinions and should in no way be construed to be the shared beliefs of my family, church, or community. You are welcome to agree or disagree and I would love to hear other opinions, but negative and hateful comments will be deleted.
There's a lot of attention lately on gay marriage. Lines of people show up to support the comments of Chik-Fil-A's founder and now lines of pro-gay marriage supporters will also show up to protest his beliefs. I can understand some of both sides of this story but understanding doesn't change my personal belief. I agree that gays should be given many of the rights (and responsibilities) of married couples. I think they should be able to form a relationship that not only entitles them to benefits like health insurance coverage through a partner's employment or the legal right to be at their partner's side in the hospital, but I also think they should be held to their commitment and have to pay child and partner support if they decide to end it. However, I don't believe that the commitment they make should be called marriage.
Throughout history, heterosexual families have been the foundation of civilization. It's the way God and nature intended things to be. Think about it- you cannot produce children from a same sex relationship. Yes, you can adopt or be artificially inseminated, but it is physically impossible for two men or two women to recreate without outside intervention. This is not the way it's supposed to be. Marriage was never meant to be just a contract for a man and woman to legally and morally have consensual sex or to enjoy the benefits of having a partner. Marriage throughout history has been the conduit for building society through bearing and raising future generations. Many heterosexual couples have forgotten this and have selfishly made marriage into a convenience for themselves without the sacrifice and work that children require. Others have made a commitment and desired children but have been unable to enjoy that blessing, or have had to turn to fertility treatments or adoption to build their family. The difference between infertile heterosexual couples and gay couples wanting children is that the heterosexual couple are physiologically made to produce children. Usually through no fault of their own they are unable to bear children. Gay couples, on the other hand, were never meant to produce children from their union. Both couples may use artificial insemination or adoption, but only the heterosexual couple is using it to fill a physiological and biological lack that naturally and normally exists.
I know this kind of thinking makes many gays mad and has them screaming about prejudice and ignorance, but no amount of argument can change reality. Love is not confined to heterosexual couples. I fully believe that most gay couples truly love and care for each other. I want them to be happy and to enjoy the rights that most couples do. But I have to stick to my belief in my Christian principles and in the facts that nature provides that gay relationships are not meant to be a substitute for marriage. Let them push for same sex unions and I'll support them all the way. Quit pushing for gay "marriage" and fighting to prove that it should and will be equal. It can't be. Not until you find a way to produce children within your relationship without outside intervention. Until then, what you have is a union. Be content with that and use your time and energy to create a loving and supportive relationship for your partner and yourself, rather than fighting nature itself.
4 comments:
I agree with you completely. I just couldn't have put it into words like you did. Amen Patty!
Me too. Very well stated!
Ditto. You have a way with words!
That basically is my own position, Patty. Just to add one thing, I believe the greatest disservice "we" inflict on our gay brothers and sister is the insistence that their feelings and actions are not "natural" (when they absolutely are, scientifically, natural) and that they not express those feelings in any way publicly.
If we removed those unrealistic and damaging expectations and allowed civil unions (especially to combat the rampant promiscuity that "closeted", clandestine relationships always produce), many of my gay friends would back away from insisting on gay marriage and accept full benefit providing civil unions. Not all would, but many would.
Post a Comment