Why not have “same sex marriage”?
Over the coming weeks we will be flooded with wonderful pictures of wholesome family groupings, two mums and a child, two dads and some children. We will hear why love should be acknowledged and celebrated, and why “same sex marriage” (SSM), or more accurately, “genderless marriage”, will have no negative effects on anyone.
However, this message will be incomplete.
Many would be hurt if this push is successful, and the lovely pictures obscure the truth.
The main reason we should reject SSM is because of children. Children deserve to grow up with their biological mother and father if at all possible. Many credible studies have shown that this is where children thrive. SSM will normalise the procuring of children specifically for the purpose of bringing them up in a less than optimal setting.
Sure, gay people love the children who are in their care just as much as straight people. Sure, some heterosexual couples abuse their children. But that is not the issue. The issue is deliberately creating situations where a child is denied the basic right of having their father and mother raise them. It is true that this is already happening in Australia, but it is not true that SSM will not make any difference. SSM will further normalise this practice, and even more children will be denied their basic rights. Children are not a commodity to be traded.
Children who are parented by same sex couples lack the role models of how to healthily relate to males and females and how a man and a woman should relate as a couple. This generates confusion and makes it more difficult for them to have healthy relationships in adult life.
The images we will see will promote same sex relationships as wholesome, happy and healthy. It would be good if that were the truth. However, male to male sex still involves subjecting the body to things it was not designed for. In practice, homosexual relationships are rarely monogamous, even within SSM. Such relationships should not be compared to normal heterosexual standards for marriage. The result of this physical abuse and promiscuity is high levels of disease, sexually transmitted and otherwise. This is not something that should be promoted as healthy and wholesome. Sadly, those who want to leave this lifestyle are abused and those who would like to help them are often subjected to legal sanctions.
It is said that arguing against SSM and not granting it will cause more self harm amongst the gay community. Those in that community do have high rates of self harm. However, this is not caused by societal rejection as it still occurs in societies where there are high levels of acceptance. It is something that goes along with the choice to follow that lifestyle. The levels of mental and physical illness that accompanies the gay lifestyle add an extra burden for any children whose parents are gay.
If SSM is introduced, despite assurances to the contrary, polyamory (polygamy) will be introduced later. The same arguments apply, and this can be seen from what is happening overseas (e.g. Colombia). If we have the further normalisation of homosexuality, we will also have further pressure to normalise gender fluidity. As a result, more children will be subjected to unnecessary surgery and hormones, in order to treat a condition that they would have naturally grown out of anyway. The end result is just more needless misery.
SSM will hurt children. It will also hurt those who do not agree with it. The experience overseas, and in Australia, is that those who speak out against it, or even those who passively refuse to provide services supporting SSM, will be hounded, driven from their jobs and will be subject to punitive legal processes. It is not just those who are wedding celebrants that need protection under the law. If SSM is legalised, this pressure will be increased dramatically.
SSM is a bad idea. It is a bad idea for society, a bad idea for those who want to pursue it and a bad idea for any children involved. For the good of our society, we need to be doing all we can to support traditional marriage, not weaken and cheapen it by introducing SSM.
The reason I am saying all this is not because I hate homosexuals. It is not because I am afraid of them. It is because I want the very best for them. They are desperately seeking for something, but sadly SSM will not provide it.