Gay People Should Have Equal Rights As Straight People Regarding Marriage and Adoption

It"s great to have a person willing to discuss this topic intellectually! In respond to your comment on the history of marriage, I do agree that in some cultures it was based on uniting two families, And I do agree that it has changed over the years. . . But some change is always beneficial, Too much change is never good. Take, For example, The analogy of corn chips. I"m making a batch of corn chips and I decide to slightly change the recipe, I reduce the amount of salt. The outcome of these chips are great. I then decide to change it further, I replace the corn with apples. Now I"m no longer eating corn chips. The same thing can be applied to marriage. There is always wriggle room (in this case the decision to make choice more important) but we shouldn"t change it so much that all reminence of the original meaning is gone. In response to your definition. I do agree that this is the current definition, But what I don"t agree with is the definition itself. I quote an article by Michael F Bird - "If marriage is the legal recognition of an emotional bond between two people then why don"t I need a license to have an emotional bond with all sorts of people like family, Friends, Or co-workers? If marriage is the recognition of a person"s regular sexual partner, Then why don"t I need government permission to hook-up or to simply have a sexual relationship with any person of my choosing? If marriage is the recognition of my domestic living arrangements, Then why don"t I need government permission to get a roommate, A housemate, Or live-in nanny? If marriage is about my designated heir and preferred carer, Then why don"t I just fill out a power of attorney form and change my will? " Marriage is the unique, Long lasting, Relationship of the male and female persons. This is what sets it apart from other relationships. (Not to say that homosexual unions are any less than heterosexuals. ) This definition is, What I believe to be, The truest definition of marriage. I have nothing against two homosexuals being wedded and granted all the benefits of married couples, It just should not be called marriage. Why? For a very simple reason. . . It just isn"t. The same way that a female is a female, And a male is a male. They are both equal, But not the same. Females don"t (and shouldn"t) need to be called males to be considered equal, The same way that homosexual unions shouldn"t need to be called "marriage" to be equal to heterosexual unions. Also a statistics show that fatherlessness does show increases in poverty, Which shows that both the mother and the father have equally important roles to play as parents, And homosexual parents can"t fill those needs as well as heterosexual parents. I do agree that good homosexual parents are better than bad heterosexual parents, But by having homosexual parents you just opening up the amount of possibilities for bad parents! Now you can have a bad mother, Two bad mothers, A bad father, Two bad fathers, A bad father and a good mother, A good mother and a bad father. . . Etc. In response to your response on my comments (try saying that ten times fast. . ) on the marriage between plants, Animals, And children, I wouldn"t like to clarify that when I said "children" I meant "child of the person" not necessarily someone young. (A 50 year old mother marrying her 20 year old son. ) You also stated that ". . . Not only is it offensive to gay people but it is not an equal comparison. " In all respect many years ago people would say the same thing if their marriage was compared to a homosexual one, So in the future your comment might be considered offensive to those who have relationships with plants, Animals ect. Also, If homosexual marriages were legal for the insentive of "love" than surely incest marriage should be allowed to take place as well? There will also be various, Radical new laws to be put into place to correspond to this new legislation, These laws are taking away things like religious freedom. 84% of the entire world population has a religion and various religion forbid Sam sex marriages. Whilst these religion may or may not be correct, It has always been a priority to respect the opinions of others. With homosexual marriages taking place religious freedom is slowly being squandered. People are being prosecuted for not catering, Or providing flowers for homosexual marriages. I believe that, Yes it isn"t correct for people to discriminate, But I don"t believe that they should be prosecuted based on their opinion. This new law will also slowly leak into the education system. In countries like Australia where this new laws was just passed, A contriversious new program was launched called "safe schools. " This education program was to be implemented into every school by the end of this year. This program forces unscientific theory into the minds of children when they are most vulnerable to misinformation. This program includes false statistics, Unscientific "facts", And political theory. This entire system was described as being a "packaged deal" with homosexual marriage. We should take Australia as a warning of the things that could amount from a legislation like this. Sources: https://www. Washingtontimes. Com/blog/watercooler/2012/dec/23/84-percent-world-population-has-faith-third-are-ch/ https://www. Acl. Org. Au/what_if_i_told_you_there_was_a_reasonable_case_against_same_sex_marriage#splash-signup https://www. Studentwellbeinghub. Edu. Au/docs/default-source/all-of-us-online-version-may-2016-v3-pdf2af89fb756c645d9b8492a68a39765f6. Pdf? Sfvrsn=0 http://youreteachingourchildrenwhat. Org/safe-schools-coalition/ https://billmuehlenberg. Com/2018/04/19/safe-schools-and-the-war-against-children-and-parents/ https://blogs. Spectator. Co. Uk/2015/06/if-love-now-rules-supreme-should-incest-and-polygamy-also-be-legalised/ http://www. Fathers. Com/statistics-and-research/the-consequences-of-fatherlessness/