May each of you have the heart to conceive, the understanding to direct, and the hand to execute works that will leave the world a little better for your having been here. -- Ronald Reagan

Sunday, May 13, 2012

Homosexual Marriage, Traditional Marriage, or Marital Contracts


In 1996 Obama stated he was for gay marriage. Following that he began running for various political offices. Then he said he was for the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman, and supported the Defense of Marriage Act. Then he instructed the Justice Department not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, adding his views of gay marriage were “evolving”. No they weren’t, he has always been pro gay marriage. At best this was a cynical political ploy, and his announcement a few days ago that he endorses gay marriage happened just before a major fund raiser with Leftist millionaire actor George Clooney and his Secularist groupthink multimillionaire Hollywood elitists. In the following days entertainment types were falling all over themselves proclaiming how historic this was, and how brave he was.

Not so much. He was already a proponent of homosexual marriage, and his statement doesn’t change a thing. Thirty states, voted on by citizens, have amended their state constitutions stating marriage is between a man and a woman. Leftist judges are trying their hardest to overturn these, ignoring the wisdom of the people and the Constitution. They must, since the Left must break down the structure of the society they are trying to dominate, to create a vacuum into which they can insert themselves.

This is in part the continuing attack on Christianity that is a Leftist hallmark, and definitely one of this Administration. Think of how the language has changed. We now talk of “traditional” marriage. When did that start? Marriage has become only a contract.

"First, contracts are limited, but parenthood is a status. Contracts are of limited duration, but parenthood is forever. Second, and more importantly, the child has been objectified. Instead of being a gift, the child is treated as a product or an object. ... Good intentions do not suffice to overcome the structural tendency for "contract parenthood" to objectify children far more often and deeply than natural parenthood.
... Biological parents, married to each other, have a great advantage: they both have a connection with the child. They've both got skin in the game, literally. When they are married to each other, they have made a commitment to work together to build a common life. The children are their common project.  This is not so for the child of an anonymous gamete donor.
Finally, the deepest reason why society has obligations to children is that this is the only position that is truly consistent with the idea that people deserve freedom, rights, and dignity in the first place.  Nature and Nature's God endowed us with certain inalienable rights."
The sanctity of communion between marriage partners, of becoming “one flesh” has been removed. God’s law, natural law, recognizes the union of man and woman is for procreation, then for the raising of children. We’ve reached a point where anyone can enter into a contract, then contract to acquire or purchase children, and if it doesn’t work out, well, just dissolve it, and rewrite the contract for the children. This is self serving and selfish.

Now marriage is separated from the idea of children. I’m reminded of a statement I heard some years back; ‘this generation likes the idea of children, they just don’t like children’. The result being there’s no stable environment for child rearing. Sure plenty of studies have come out saying children brought into same sex marriages or civil unions are just as well off as those in “traditional” cross sex marriages. These are “scientific” studies, and are supposed to be untouched by bias. How many times over how many years have scientific facts been proven wrong, refuted? Human nature is constant, and what’s in the hearts, souls and minds can’t be measured.  Here are some results of other scientific studies. The divorce rate has doubled since the institution of no fault divorce. 85% of abortions are outside of wedlock, and is being re-termed “selective reduction”. The break up rate for homosexual couples is one and a half to two and a half times higher than heterosexuals. Infidelity rates are higher for homosexual relationships. There are higher STD rates and higher suicide rates with homosexual relationships. Those are measurable, but are emotional stability and mental mindset as measurable by science?

Back in the 1960’s and ‘70’s the homosexual community had a legitimate gripe, and that was social shunning and civil/legal discrimination. Much work and time was taken to overcome that, and civil unions were finally legalized, and with few exceptions by intolerant people, accepted. Now, pushing to redefine marriage to include whatever anyone wants it to be, is a step too far. Don't care who you choose as a lover, this is an attack on the foundation of civilization, putting selfish desires ahead of what is good for society. Cross sex marriage and the raising of children is what has worked since the dawn of civilization, and the selfish notion of each individual can decide what it is, is short sighted and destructive.

Now we’re at a crossroads. Do we define marriage based on what Joe Biden has said?
“Look, I just think that the good news is that as more and more Americans come to understand what this is all about, it's a simple proposition: Who do you love? Who do you love? And will you be loyal to the person you love? And that's what people are finding out, is what all marriages at their root are about, whether they're marriages of lesbians or gay men or heterosexuals.”

Is it only about two people loving each other, and for that they get recognition and benefits from the State? What about three or more people saying they love each other? Or is it the communion of two people, who from that love produce loved children? Mutual love, mutually producing loved children, or are children an abstract acquisition? Is it about children and their well being, or about meeting the desires of adults?

James Schall:
We are not a culture that never understood what a human being was in his nature and in his destiny.  Rather we are a culture that, having once known these things, has decided against living them or understanding them.  Indeed, we have decided to reject most of them, almost as an act of defiance -- as an act of pure humanism -- as if what we are is not first given to us.

Given to us by God, not by the State. 

Alan Keys on Marriage
Some "moderator". Asks a question then argues. Often people don't hear what another is saying, only take a piece of the conversation, process their argument and attack. Sad. Worth getting past that, and listen to what Keys says.


2 comments:

rob said...

Thanks for posting this, TMP--yet another excellent piece!

Steven Dexter said...

Thanks much Rob.