I oppose civil unions between same-sex couples on the following
grounds:
First, there is no
need for new legislation if civil unions are truly the goal. All Americans,
have the right to enter into a civil contract with whomever they want. They can
name power of attorney, living wills, beneficiaries and other civil matters in
such a contract. They can have an approximation of the benefits of marriage in
such a contract. (Dirty little secret: Civil unions are not about civil
protections, they are about social engineering.)
Second, you cannot
make unreality real. Marriage by definition is the union of one man and one
woman as the central unit of society, designed for the bearing and rearing of
children and for the stabilizing force that it has on society as a whole. A
union between same-sex couples is not marriage. No children can be born from such a union, and
it is far from clear that raising children in a home united by civil union is
good for the child or community.
You cannot make
a dog into a cat. You cannot make a tree into a frog. You cannot make something
that is not marriage into marriage. The convolution of the language does not change
reality. Same-sex couples can live together in loving, long-term relationships,
but they cannot, and never can be, married. Those who talk about an evolving
society and concept do not understand that, for homosexuals, evolution is a
mixed metaphor as it cannot happen in society, only through biological
reproduction in which they cannot participate.
Third, the cost to
the government will be massive. Every statute and law which addresses marriage
or legal relationships of married and related people in anyway, will have to be
altered to fit the language of the Civil Unions bill. In essence, marriage will
have lost its meaning, and this vital institution will be open to any and all
comers, and any whim, fad, or cry for equal rights that may come down the
cultural path in the future. This will
put the stamp of acceptability on bigamy, polygamy, and even bestiality.
Fourth, why on earth
would same-sex couples want to bring divorce upon their community? With a
legally licensed union, and a contractual agreement between one another and the
state, and across state lines, divorce is inevitable. Divorce is a terrible
thing to have to endure and is the leading cause of poverty and children
neglect. Even among heterosexuals it
nearly ranks as child abuse. Out of
compassion I ask, why in the world would any group want to add divorce to the
equation of already complicated lives?
Civil unions and
homosexual marriage are not about civil rights.
They are about social engineering.
Posts
