Re: OT - Marriage (spawned from page 4 of "American President" thread)
I know that I will probably regret this. But, I am continually bothered by how sanctimonious some people get when they snidely point out how intolerant and judgemental religious people are. Irony anyone?
There are many, many posts in this thread now whose basic message, distilled down, is man, religious people are idiots. How can you be so naive, and so uninformed on how the universe really works. I mean really, believing in God, that is just stupid.
Seriously, for people who talk about how judgemental religious people are, some of you are really coming of as bigots.
Now, I am going to just plainly state my opinion on some of the things argued here. I tried to keep it just to the law, and I appreciate Caly's very civil conversation with me about such.
Liq- while you, in my opinion, have a very strong argument about rights ending where your nose begins, you forget one major portion of the equation when you talk about adoption agencies. The child. As soon as a third party is brought in, it is societies right and obligation to care what is happening. Now, the question then becomes, when and where does society have a right to step in.
If an adoption agency were judging off of someone's race, clearly wrong. But, when you bring in lifestyle, that is a completely different thing. Lifestyle is, in my opinion, a vital portion of what an adoption agency should be looking at. Now, you feel that there is nothing wrong with the lifestyle, thats fine, you are welcome to that opinion.
An adoption agency, whose purpose is to find homes that will be the best for the child, not only have the right, but the duty to try to find the best home. Am I saying that a *** couple cannot love a child? No. Am I making some sort of argument that they will spread their gayness? No, that is asinine. First, I have a religious disagreement with the lifestyle, I believe it to be wrong. And, I believe that I have a duty to vote according to what I feel will be best for the society. Beyond religion, I believe that a child has the best chance when they have a mother and a father. You can consider that hateful, or bigoted, or whatever. I believe that with all the research I have seen, that it is fairly obvious that a child has the best environment with a mother and a father.
Many may say, yeah, well heterosexual marriages end constantly, its not like they are doing what they are 'supposed' to. I couldn't agree more. My job puts me in court constantly trying to establish, modify, or enforce child support, often with parents who are more interested in hurting one another than caring about the child. Believe me, I have seen the ugly side of marriage. And the consequences of how freely our society views sexual relationships. Marriage has changed over the last fifty years, and in my opinion, it isn't for the better.
I believe that the most important unit in a stable society is the family. I stand against anything that destroys the family. Drug use, alcohol abuse, spousal abuse, 'free' love, etc. etc. etc. I believe that it is my responsibility as a citizen of my society to vote my conscience on what I think will most help the society thrive, and succeed. Stability comes from the family unit, and I believe that the best stability comes from a father, mother, and children. That may seem naive and old fashioned, but I just don't care.
I do not hate anyone who is ***. I do not think of them as lesser people. I do not wish them ill, or harm. But, especially in the realm of adoption, I do not think that *** couples, or civil unions, etc., should be afforded protections against adoption agencies that would refuse them. At that point it is not about their private lives, it is about the society as a whole, and at that point, I feel completely justified in standing up for what I believe is right.
Google