Free-IQTest.net – Free IQ Test
Why homosexuals don’t deserve or need marriages
It amazes me how so many things that were unthinkable just 60 years ago are now considered to be settled rights instead…the “mercy killing” of the disabled, handicapped infants and old people, elective abortions, birth control for teenagers and the assumption that they are incapable of self control, the banning of public displays of Christianity,like Christmas trees,crosses, and nativity scenes,the banning of prayer in public and in the schools, the protection of the most vile art and pornography as expression,the list is a LONG one. Now we’re adding homosexual marriage as the right of the month.
There are perfectly valid reasons why homosexuals do not NEED marriage,and should be denied it as a “right”,while heterosexual couples DO need it.
Historically,the marriage of a man and a woman was celebrated as their legal and moral union, which was expected to result in their having and rearing children of their own. The marriage gave everyone certain legal rights and protections. The children would have the family name,and the right to be supported financially by the father as well as he was able to do it,sometimes with the assistance of the wife and children working,also. The children grew up with both parents,and as adults, left home to marry and raise families of their own. Things weren’t always perfect,but people had a FAMILY their whole life, and were related by blood and marriage to OTHER people,grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins, and other,more distant relatives,who often lived nearby, and who looked out for them,too,in a way that mere friends and acquaintances didn’t. Most often, the married couple were faithful to each other, and that protected them from a myriad of problems: illegitimacy, sexually transmitted disease,ruined reputations (with the sting of social ostracism) and marital breakdown. It wasn’t a perfect system, since people aren’t, but it worked for millenia,all over the world, in some form, in all cultures,with only minor variations, and it WORKED. Civilization itself began as an organized way to protect, help and preserve families.
Even in the most”advanced”, sexually open cultures of history,like Greece and Rome, where homosexuality was openly practiced, even by the ruling class, homosexual MARRIAGE was unknown. People understood that there were large,distinct differences betweeen a homosexual union and a heterosexual one that made marriage for the former unnecessary and even perhaps ridiculous.
I will now enumerate some of those differences.
Firstly,everyone knows that among male homosexuals, promiscuity is the norm, and considered to be the ideal,too. Traditional marriage is supposed to confer a certain exclusivity, “cleave only unto him/her for as long as you both shall live”. Adultery is a widespread problem,but the majority of married people are faithful to their spouses. For a homosexual couple to marry who have no intention at all to BE faithful for life to the other person is to make a travesty out of the institution of marriage. In a case like that, all the “wedding” is is a fancy, expensive party to publicly announce who one’s current housemate is and proclaim one’s homosexuality, and the “marriage” is meaningless. I thought it significant when the first homosexual men to VERY publicly marry in San Francisco began divorce proceedings about a year later.
Secondly,homosexuals claim that only in marriage can they have legal rights to inheritance,getting medical insurance and other employment benefits for the dependent partner,etc.,etc. That is not true. I have lived in New York and the state of Washington most recently. In both states, homosexuals have all the legal rights to those things as “domestic partners” that married people do. On every insurance policy in our files, it says “spouse or domestic partner”, NOT just “spouse”,so the big insurance companies are nondiscriminatory towards homosexual couples. Marriage is NOT needed for getting “benefits”.
Thirdly,homosexuals,by definition, cannot impregnate each other, so can never, by the usual means, bear and raise children between them. Since homosexual men have such unstable sexual relationships,that is a good thing. Since they cannot have their own children, they have no need of marriage to protect the legal and moral rights of those children.
Multitudinous studies have shown, again and again, that, contrary to the radical feminists’ mendacious ravings, children are better off,by ALL measures,when they grow up in an INTACT family,with male father and female mother,who married before the kids were conceived. This is even true of an ABUSIVE family. Children from abusive. permanently married parents are STILL better off than those from broken homes or single mothers. This being so,it stands to reason that, if the child’s welfare is REALLY the most important consideration, then every child should be adopted by a married heterosexual couple. If that is going on, then the homosexuals will have no children that need legal or moral protections, so,again, no marriage is necessary.
Forthly, the homosexuals’ out-of-control behavior when Prop 8 passed in California was thuggish,amoral,despicable and criminal. They behaved like a gigantic street gang. If ever homosexual marriage is conferred as a “right”,other activist groups will remember that, and will likely behave as badly,or worse, in order to get THEIR way. That would be setting a horrible precedent. Such sociopathic movements deserve to LOSE whatever it is they want badly enough to blatantly break a multitude of laws when their demands are not met.
Fifth, the sexually transmitted diseases that homosexuals get from and give to each other,like AIDS, hepatitis B,syphilis and so on, represent a growing public health menace. Homos’ sexual activity is the engine driving the spread of these diseases. To make homosexual marriage a “right” is to give legally protected status to what is actually a PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARD. That is so VERY crazy that I can’t even think of how to express it. It would give us a PERMANENT reservoir for AIDS,which will undoubtedly be treated by BILLIONS in TAX DOLLARS per YEAR,and additional billions in health insurance payouts, which will drive premiums sky-high for EVERYONE.
Lastly, the homosexual activists promised that, if the states would please only allow “civil unions”, the homosexuals would NEVER EVER push for homosexual MARRIAGE. They have very openly BROKEN that promise,though the states HAVE allowed civil unions. Again,for being so deceitful, they DESERVE to lose.
I may be wrong…but I doubt it.
