Grassroots Commentary
Same-Sex Marriage Is Anti-Gender Marriage
If we redefine marriage to include same-gender couples, we're saying there is no important difference between the partnership of two men, and the union of one man and one woman. In other words, women are disposable. They can be excluded from marriage and replaced with men. This is gender discrimination. This eliminates femininity and motherhood from the basic family unit. This is anti-gender.
Example: Sex advice columnist and SSM advocate Dan Savage likes to refer to a woman's birth canal as the "hole that sh**s babies." If a Christian like Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy uttered such a sexist slur, the media would rip into him. But because Savage speaks for the gay community, he gets a media pass and an invite to the White House.
At the same time, allowing unigender couples to marry means that two women can marry each other, eliminating men from the family. Again, this is gender segregation and gender discrimination. This is anti-gender.
Because same-sex marriage is gender-exclusive, government forms need to be changed. Gender-specific words such as "bride" and "groom" are eliminated and replaced with the gender-neutral and less-inspiring word "spouse." "Mother" and "father" are old-school; it's "Parent A" or "Parent B."
Example: Harvard College recently hired Vanidy "Van" Bailey as the first permanent director of bisexual, gay, lesbian, transgender, and queer student life. According to the Harvard Crimson, "Bailey prefers not to be referred to by any gendered pronoun." For only $54,496 per year, your son or daughter ... child, can learn that using gender-specific words such as he and she is taboo.
Although liberals prefer to call it marriage "equality," how is intentionally depriving a child of a lifelong relationship with her mother "equality"? Is separating genders in marriage the best method to foster tolerance in children? Do we really want to go back to the "separate but equal" mentality?
Who the heck wants to be called "Parent B"?
Before we self-righteously vote for same-sex marriage, it's crucial to examine the ramifications. Same-sex marriage denigrates gender and denies developing children gender-diversity in the home. SSM advocates talk about the loving and committed relationship it honors until death do them part, but by its very nature, same-sex marriage automatically deprives children from having a loving and committed relationship with both a mother and a father for their entire lives. Same-sex marriage promotes an anti-gender mentality.
Read the labels carefully.
Only 1.4% of the population has same-sex attraction. But we all have a gender.
Defend pro-gender marriage.
2 Comments
Jim in Alabama
Wednesday, August 1, 2012 at 4:26 PM
Good points, all. Seriously.
But you're forgetting that same sex marriage still discriminates against the Bi-People, and, God knows, I can't figure out what it does for the Trans-People. And what about those Multi-People? It only stands to reason that Schizophrenic Multiple Personality People (who we now KNOW are all born that way) should need multiple marriage partners! And what about People that get Animated by Animals? (I kind of wonder if my wife doesn't prefer our cats to me anyway). So you don't have to worry. If all goes according to plan after the next generation of marriage re-shaping, there will Guys and Gals and Puppy Dogs Spouses and really weird Frankensteinian experimental Multiple Sex Organ Transplant People, enough to go around to entertain all the children and ensure a truly healthy balance in their developmental processes.
Isn't it really Cool to live in such times of amazing sanity!
Adrien Nash in Crescent City, CA
Saturday, August 4, 2012 at 5:13 AM
Having both a father and a mother is an unalienable human right inherent to the human existence that mankind's Creator intended for those who he fashioned in his own image. It's the Ying and Yang of the universe, -the Black & White, the Cold & Hot, -the soft and the hard, -the tender and the strong, -the nurturing and the disciplining. The Male & the Female. Why would anyone (i.e., a homosexual married couple) want to deprive a child of the natural blessing of having both? Because they are ignorant of human nature and the benefit of having gender role models. They may have a whole lot of love to give and it may be a huge improvement over having none for some unwanted orphan, but it doesn't follow that a natural family unit is not superior to an unnatural family unit. Though to be fair, it isn't necessarily so because of the vagaries of flawed human character, but it is true in general. Accepting and admitting that fact is the beginning of wisdom and dialog.