Gay wedlock would lead to worse

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | 2/17/04 | GEORGE M. WEAVER

[JesseHousman]

Legalization of same-sex marriage would be a seismic event across this culture. Nothing would ever be the same. Every young child asks his parents, "Can boys [or girls] get married to each other"? If the answer changes from "no" to "yes," homosexuality would have then achieved equal status with heterosexual conduct and marriage. This equivalence would be taught in schools, observed in the workplace and eventually imposed even on churches.

If the answer becomes "yes" there will doubtless be a dramatic increase in the incidence of homosexuality. Sexual arousal is a mystical thing, subject to conditioning. How else can one explain bisexuality, transsexuality, or those who migrate from one orientation to another? We should not underestimate the power of continued Hollywood marketing of homosexuality, the human drive for pleasure and official government approval to mold behavior in this area.

And same-sex marriage would not work. It might seem like a benign idea that would lead to more stability in homosexual relationships -- among people who, after all, are "born that way." But there is no evidence that homosexuality is genetically determined. Such relationships are inherently dysfunctional because we are not made that way. We all know that sometimes heterosexual marriage does not work either, but at least it can work and certainly provides the ideal matrix for raising children.

Moreover, it is doubtful that most homosexuals really want marriage. The mind-set appears to be abandonment of restraint, not fidelity or acceptance of a different restraint such as lifelong homosexual marriage.

By the time it is proved that same-sex marriages don't work, irreparable damage will have been done to traditional marriage, which has already been weakened by divorce and extramarital cohabitation. Damage will be compounded by the ramifications of same-sex marriage. As Georgia law presently stands, pedophilic homosexual marriages would immediately be legal if same-sex marriage were instituted today. A 50-year-old man or woman could marry a 16-year-old (and in some cases younger) boy or girl. And the very same sham constitutional privacy arguments used by the U.S. Supreme Court and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court will be, and in some cases already have been, made for legalization of incestuous and polygamous or group marriages (including same-sex, opposite sex and bisexual varieties).

How about two men and three women? By the time all of this comes to fruition, the whole concept of marriage will be meaningless for all of us and it will be impossible to repair the damage.

Moreover, our democracy will be shattered if judges, our black-robed masters, are allowed to continue using the pretense of constitutional construction to impose their personal social agendas, without regard to the wishes of the majority.

The only solution, apart from a revolt against the judicial oligarchs, is a constitutional amendment. We must act soon.

George M. Weaver is an Atlanta attorney.

[Semper_guy]

But the reality is still that heterosexual pedophiles DO exist. Even If statistically it is less than instances of homosexual pedophilia, it cannot be ignored. It cannot be dismissed as a "gay Problem". To do so negates the suffering of tens of thousands of past, present and future victims.

[Semper_guy]

I think you have a great point--when marriage ceased to be a purely religious ceremony, it lost a lot it's signifigance. Marrying has all the importance of getting a new passport photo for some. I can argue marriage as a civil right because it has become a state-run service offered to citizens and taxpayers. Gay people are both, and deserve the same luxuries the government offers the rest of us. Who somebody sleeps with is irrelevant.

Personally I think Marriage should be a wholly religious ceremony, where the oaths we swear mean something, because we swear them to god. If we believe in a separated church and state, then the government has no business performing marriages in the first place. Then the main issue would be freedom of speech and freedom of religion, in which case nobody could force any church to marry anybody who's lifestyle it didn't condone.

[Semper_guy]

I think an issue you're overlooking is consent. An animal cannot consent to an act. When two adults consent to a given act, where is the crime, when nobody is harmed? But you are right, given the existance of NAMBLA, I wouldn't be surprised to see the day...

[Semper_guy]

I remember the day I figured out gay folks were more or less like us. It was watching a lesbian couple bicker over some tiny, stupid thing only a married couple would bother to bicker over.

[Semper_guy]

But couldn't you also say to be a jew is to defy God? or a Muslim? Or an agnostic? Would you have issue living within three blocks of a Bhuddist? Or a Shintoist? A Hindu? All these are an "affront" to God, but as a country we welcome them. Sure, it's creepy when men kiss, but so long as they don't kiss me, it's none of my business.

[Semper_guy]

I miss the point--he rubbed frosting on her face because he's gay? I think you're confusing gay with simply being an idiot. He's an idiot and an ass for embarrasing your daughter, these things are not specifically linked to homosexuality. If your daughter punched him in the nose, I would not link it to her being straight.

[biblewonk]

But couldn't you also say to be a jew is to defy God? or a Muslim? Or an agnostic? Would you have issue living within three blocks of a Bhuddist? Or a Shintoist? A Hindu? All these are an "affront" to God, but as a country we welcome them. Sure, it's creepy when men kiss, but so long as they don't kiss me, it's none of my business.

The Jew one is a very technical question some of which is found in Romans 9-11. To be a non Christian and atleast live within some of the rules that God has laid out will bring about quite a few blessings. God says in Romans that nature/creation itself testifies of God and we are all without excuse for not knowing Him. I can't lay my fingers on scripture to illustrate what I am trying to say though. In the bible you see honorable mention given to prostitutes quite a few times as well as to heathens but never once do you see that for gays. Rather you see them referred to as dogs. That is an extreem diss in the bible.

Some of the religions you mentioned are so demonic that you see the same kinds of problems in those cultures that you see in gay cultures so there must be cases where what you suggest is true. Gays have a very high probability of violent deaths but look at Islam. That violent aspect of the Gay lifestyle is something that has not been very well explored. There are references in the bible to violence and other sin in Sodom.

[biblewonk]

The poster I was responding to was making the point that gays do s good job of passing themselves off as decent/normal people with one tiny little difference from the rest of us. His point is that that is not really the case and that there are a lot of very deep emotional problems that go with that lifestyle and a lot of gross and twisted perversions as well. My comment touched upon that at an entry level.

[GrandMoM]

Andrew Sullivan, a homosexual activist writing in his book, "Virtually Normal", says that once same-sex marriage is legalized, heterosexuals will have to develop a greater "understanding of the need for extramarital outlets between two men than between a man and a woman." He notes: The truth is, homosexuals are not entirely normal; and to flatten their varied and complicated lives into a single, moralistic model is to miss what is esential and exhilarating about their otherness."
(Sullivan, Virtually Normal, pp 202-203)

[Semper_guy]

Bare in mind that the bible, along with homosexuality also calls shellfish an abomination, so it should all be taken in context. Although to be frank I hate lobster. ^_^

An old Jewish saying I learned many years back is this: "All mountains reach for the sky", or to be more literal, all religion is a search for god, for truth. Militants are an abomination to humanity, regardless of the religion. But all humans yearn for meaning, it's our nature.

[biblewonk]

Bare in mind that the bible, along with homosexuality also calls shellfish an abomination, so it should all be taken in context.

Your sentence makes it sound like homo's really hate shell fish. I think that's not what you mean. The bible puts aside rules about all food except blood in the book of acts but in Romans we see that sodomy is still an abomination.

[longtermmemmory]

I would submit the additional

3. Impairment in the normal development and providing for children.

[Semper_guy]

I just feel sincerely that if two men or two women want to have a relationship, and both are of legal age, it is not really a concern of mine. In fact it is a concern, because if the government bows to pressure and outlaws gay lifestyles, and returns us to a time when "sodomy" is illegal, then what's next? Will it issue pamphlets on "legal" intercourse? This is accepted, this isn't? Holding hands yes, no kissing for more than five seconds in public? eight inches between bodies while dancing? Head down keep moving?
the government has no business in the bedrooms of North America. Currently, we can't drink the water pretty much anywhere from polution, and the great lakes smell like unflushed toilets, and oil dependancy keeps us slaves to the middle East. I think these are bigger priorities with much more problematic results for America than men kissing.

[Semper_guy]

..And as I understand it, the gay community enjoys shellfish as much as the next. ^_^