I can respect and tolerate that consensual adults of the same sex find fornicating one another their right to do. Yet why can’t they respect and tolerate that I, among many, find it misleading to “educate” others that this behavior is “normal” or “natural” by any stretch of the imagination? It is an anomaly at best and a very bizarre one to many of us because it flies in the face of evolutionary protocol. To me, it is hypocritical to engage in a practice antithetical to the evolutionary foundations of the human family and yet demand the array of privileges this institution rests upon.
This hypocritical demand of gays to get married will not change the “physics” of same-sex fornication — all the morals, religions and legal jargon in the world cannot fool Mother Nature nor a great many of the rest of us. Marriage will not “turn” homosexuality into a natural union any more than the act itself will produce offspring. Yet, no one questions the confusion of children who have two mommies or two daddies, when everyone else has one each. Is this fair to them? If one truly cares for children, would they not consider the dilemma they put upon children by wanting to raise them in the aberration of a homosexual household setting? If one is adult enough to prefer being gay, why not also be adult enough to accept that this preference has costs and consequences?
Be who you are, but please, respect that not everyone celebrates your preferences to be “different.” Heterosexuals are naturally inclined away from them for instinctual reasons beyond our ability or desire to change and we prefer it that way. We would like our children to be allowed to develop the same with a respectful tolerance for those not like ourselves.
Gloria Flor
Brainerd
Comments (6)
Add commentVery thoughtful and well-written letter Gloria...
Prepare yourself for the virtual excoriation you are about to receive as punishment for your unwillingness to see homosexual relationships are providing the same benefits to society as healthy heterosexual marriages. It's inevitable as night following day...counting down 10, 9, 8...
Yet, no one questions the
Yet, no one questions the confusion of children who have two mommies or two daddies, when everyone else has one each.
Well, Gloria, you forgot...not everyone else has one of each. Why don't we address the child who has a mother with several other children, all by different fathers. And the child whose father lives with some other family. And the child that has multiple half siblings because the father has multiple "baby mamas". How about the children born to single parent homes because they are the result of a 1 night hook up? Wouldn't all these children be "confused" as well? How come you are not chastising parents in this case? Apparently they must not "truly care for children" either because they have not "considered the dilemma they have put upon the children."
Oh, and how about those heterosexual couples that are abusive, neglectful, and/or chemically dependent? Wouldn't their children be confused as well?
There are worse households to be raised in than one where 2 adults of the same sex model respectful behavior and provide a loving and safe environment for children to grow and learn in.
You may have an argument if, in fact, the norm was for each and every child to be raised in a financially secure, safe and happy home headed by a heterosexual married couple. But look around, that is not the norm, and it hasn't been for quite some time.
I don't disagree with you Okey-Dokey...
...regarding relational abuses amongst heterosexuals. We need to clean up traditional marriage and regain a proper understanding of it. It is an extremely important institution for the survival of our species and the failure of men and women to take it seriously has caused great damage to society. But please explain how refusing to define marriage as being between one man and one woman will improve any of those situations.
To children, normal is what they live.
A child from 2 mommies or two daddies has no idea that THAT isn't normal. It is their normal. And I'll bet that gay parents are among the most conscientious and caring parents due to the struggles it took just to add a child to their family. The few I know fit a very caring profile. Children do not know what abhorrent is until they are taught it. Bigotry or condemnation of any sort always begins at home. Marriage is not about children, it is about a deep commitment to another adult. Marriage also carries legal rights to the partners in that commitment. 151 of them in fact. google it...
This vote is not about taking away any church's right to deny the religious ceremony to anyone for any reason they choose. Any church will still be able to refuse their services there. It is simply about equal human rights in this country. 50 years ago it was illegal for people of color to marry Caucasians in many states. Some saw it as abhorrent! My parents were among them seeing it as such. Fortunately they have grown a bit in the last 50 years. This is merely a civil rights issue. Please do not buy into the hate filled lies against the GLTB community. Homosexual behavior and commitment is found in over 1,500 species of animal life. It has been around longer than organized religion. It is not a *choice* and there are genetic scientific studies proving it. To punish people for a somewhat uncommon genetic difference just seems ignorant and bigoted to me.
I couldn't disagree with you more...
...marriage IS about children. And it is the selfish idea that it is all about adults that has led to the weakening of traditional marriage over the last 4+ decades. The data is in and the best environment for children to be raised in is an intact family, with a father and a mother. This whole push for creating an alternate family design around a homosexual relationship reminds me of the social scientists from past generations who argued that divorce wasn't so bad for children. Do children really need TWO parents? What could it hurt if parents divorced or never got married in the first place? Well, after nearly half a century, the answer is clear, it hurts children quite a lot, and we need to turn that disasterous trajectory around or our society will not thrive.
The data on children
How many committed LGTB couples raising children were taken into account with the said data? My guess is zero. If this constitutional amendment is truly about *children* shouldn't there also be a provision prohibiting marriage after a certain age, say 55 as that is generally beyond child bearing age? Or revoking marriage licenses from people who choose not to have children if they do not conceive after a certain amount of time? And what about those couples who face the painful struggles of infertility... revoke their marriage licenses also? I would find any of THAT abhorrent. I think most people would. No, this amendment is about a legal agreement between two consenting adults and all the civil/legal rights that go along with it. Nothing more, nothing less. It is a constitutional amendment created to deny such rights to a very particular group of American citizens. It is prejudicial in nature and form. Married LGTB parents can be just as caring and nurturing as married heterosexual parents. Get out and meet some and see for yourself.