I have no problem with what Gays do behind closed doors. I’m not anti-Gay but I believe marriage is about a mom, dad and the strong probability of children. Gays don’t need this strictly symbolic legal status. It makes a mockery out of marriage when gays call themselves husbands and wives. In the case of a transgender person I’d concede that could be a legitimate marriage.
Civil Unions are the way to go for Gays. They can have their honeymoons and give each other presents and such. They can carryon anyway they choose as long as the peace is not breached.
As for Gay adoption, I support it for those in committed relationships that will protect the children. There are so many children put through horrible abuse by their natural parents. There are plenty of kids that need a safe refuge. There is the not so simple issue of a boy growing up sharing with his schoolmates that he has two daddies. I don’t have a clue how that will not cause ridicule and a beating.
Guys have to be more reasonable that to demand a right to marriage when they don’t fit the mold. No matter what the law says the fact that marriage requires both a man and a woman does not change.
Comments
Will you marrie me?
Within 100 years marriage will be non existent and the word "wedding" will signify a big party a woman throws to commemorate some event in her life.
As to adoption, I think that, given the differences between the sexes (not Genders, that is a word for Grammar), children need to be raised by someone of the same sex as themselves, and also by someone of the opposite sex. They need to learn the strengths and weaknesses of each sex "up close and personal", and it is natural for little boys to be comforted and indulged by their mothers and held to standards by their fathers, and vice-versa for little girls. I just don't see that as happening with same sex adoptions.
I do agree with you that this respect for blood relationships in family law court for custody decisions is so mad as to be toxic.