Having to Take A Stand
Issues are shaping up for this next presidential election and politicians are posturing. Who will defend what? How will they defend it?
I want to write about a couple things that will help me decide who I will vote for, perhaps more than anything else. These issues go to the heart of who we are as a people and what America will be for my life. It is my responsibility as an American to be involved or I am simply allowing those who do care shape my future.
The issue that I find to be the most important in the upcoming elections is allowing homosexual people to use the word "marriage" to codify their unions. I don't know if I am going to be able to articulate my thoughts as well as I would like, but I warn you now that this blog will not be short, so if you want to skip it and wait for a more succinct installment on another subject, you should stop now.
Marriage is between man and woman. Families are created when a man and a woman come together and pledge to dedicate their lives to each other and to the children they will create together. Societies form when families come together and live according to standards and traditions that everyone agrees upon. Societies cannot survive without this foundation. Hundreds of millions of years of natural selection (if you believe in this type of thing) and thousands of years of human society testify to these very simple facts.
Homosexual unions destroy the very fabric of our society. They attempt to change what everything else is built upon. Whatever comes from it simply cannot be expected to hold together. Strong families are needed now in our society more than ever before, and this attacks the very thing we are most lacking.
This becomes especially true when one looks at the truth about the homosexual community. The VAST majority of homosexuals are not monogamous, even within a "life union." Most have more than an HUNDRED partners a year and those that are in unions are still shown to be less than faithful, far moreso than the vast majority of heterosexual couples. This has been proven by study after study. If you talk to homosexuals, they will tell you the same thing. The idea of a single monogamous relationship is completely foreign to their culture.
And a single monogamous relationship is exactly what is needed for society. Some have argued that we need the "diversity" that homosexual behavior brings to our society and that we need to be "tolerant" of others people's views. They compare the struggle for "equality" of homosexuals to that of the civil rights movement of the sixties for underprivileged minorities. None of these arguments hold up upon closer scrutiny.
Diversity in a community is a wonderful thing. There is a tremendous level of diversity in this world and I think America would do well to continue to take what it finds to be the best of all cultures around the world and incorporate it into her own. This very process is what makes America the greatest country in the world. But that doesn't include indiscriminately accepting the worst of other cultures as well. It would be like sitting down at a table covered with succulent meats, lush fresh fruits and vegetables, as well as delicately and carefully prepared dishes from all over the world. Then you are presented with a plate covered with rotten beef covered in worms with putrid cabbage and molding pastas and you are told that with everything else, you must eat this plate as well in order to be appreciate "diversity." Suddenly the idea of accepting anything and everything doesn't make as much sense.
The same goes for tolerance. Tolerating other ideas and ways of thinking is very important in order to learn and grow. But tolerance also involves being able to then make decisions once you are presented with different ideas and then choose. It involves acknowledging rights and wrongs and being willing to examine one's own views but not throw them out with each new idea presented. Society must NOT be tolerant of some types of behavior. We must not tolerate drunks behind the wheel of a car. We must not tolerate people injecting themselves with certain types of drugs or people having sex with as many people as they want when they have communicable diseases. Society puts limits on tolerance out of self-preservation. We simply cannot tolerate everything. A completely open and tolerant culture is one that is on the road to social suicide.
Finally, the argument that the struggle for "equality" by homosexuals before the law being analogous to the civil rights movement is simply absurd. First of all, people who are homosexual in nature ARE equal before the law. There is nothing that separates them from everyone else. There is nothing legally discriminatory about the laws the way they are now. What homosexuals are seeking is to be considered FAVORED in the eyes of the law by seeking to change the nature of marriage so that they can receive the same benefits as married couples. They are seeking to change the very basis upon which society exists. They want the benefits of the privilege (marriage is a privilege NOT a right) without adhering to the boundaries of the institution.
As for its comparison to racism, racism is irrational. Hating a person for the color of their skin is hating a person for what they were born with, not for their actions. Opposition to homosexuality is not opposition to biology, it is opposition to a trend in society that attacks the very roots of who were are as a people. In a racist society, a person of another colored skin could never do anything to achieve equal status. People who have homosexual tendancies, however, have a very real and active choice in how they are treated and ultimately define how people treat them based on their actions.
Allowing homosexuals to sanction their unholy unions and call them "marriage" leads towards the dissolution of marriage in any definable form. If homosexuals are allowed to be married, what stops people from practicing polygamy? What stops men marrying animals, from people marrying their next of kin? Since the definition is tampered with, you can change it to fit anything you want.
What concerns me even more than the idea of condoning homosexual unions is allowing them to raise children in their homes. More than anything, I think this is the greatest evil. Children need a stable home with a mother and a father that were born with the respective plumbing. Children need role models who are both masculine and feminine and exemplify what those things mean. Children need a father who is male, a mother who is female. They need both parents who love them and are faithful to each other. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE. Any tampering with this formula is doing evil against the child and should only be resorted to under the greatest of duress, not out of personal decision. That is how nature works, how society has always properly worked, and if you'll allow me to use a religious reference (God forbid we should in a nation of the 1st Amendment) it is how God has always wanted us to be.
After all that has been written here, I want to say that I am not proporting violence against homosexuals. I don't believe in legislation against sodomy or persecution of adults who choose to practice it. I DO believe that as a society we should discouarage it through the media, education and cultural groups just as we discouarge other types of socially destructive behavior like alcoholism and drug use. But I don't think we should drive them out. And I don't believe we should order our police into anyone's bedroom as long as consenting adults are the only ones in that room .
My conclusion is that homosexuality is wrong but should be tolerated among consenting adults. Changing the laws to allow homosexuals favored status comparable to married couples before the law is wrong and should not be tolerated. People practicing homosexuality should niether be allowed to call their unions "marriage" nor should they be allowed to adopt children. I am taking a stand here and believe these things with all my heart. I say these things with love towards everyone and hate towards no one. Our society must stand upon some principle or it will fall without a foundation. And whoever among our society's leaders are willing to take a stand with me, it is they who I will follow.
I want to write about a couple things that will help me decide who I will vote for, perhaps more than anything else. These issues go to the heart of who we are as a people and what America will be for my life. It is my responsibility as an American to be involved or I am simply allowing those who do care shape my future.
The issue that I find to be the most important in the upcoming elections is allowing homosexual people to use the word "marriage" to codify their unions. I don't know if I am going to be able to articulate my thoughts as well as I would like, but I warn you now that this blog will not be short, so if you want to skip it and wait for a more succinct installment on another subject, you should stop now.
Marriage is between man and woman. Families are created when a man and a woman come together and pledge to dedicate their lives to each other and to the children they will create together. Societies form when families come together and live according to standards and traditions that everyone agrees upon. Societies cannot survive without this foundation. Hundreds of millions of years of natural selection (if you believe in this type of thing) and thousands of years of human society testify to these very simple facts.
Homosexual unions destroy the very fabric of our society. They attempt to change what everything else is built upon. Whatever comes from it simply cannot be expected to hold together. Strong families are needed now in our society more than ever before, and this attacks the very thing we are most lacking.
This becomes especially true when one looks at the truth about the homosexual community. The VAST majority of homosexuals are not monogamous, even within a "life union." Most have more than an HUNDRED partners a year and those that are in unions are still shown to be less than faithful, far moreso than the vast majority of heterosexual couples. This has been proven by study after study. If you talk to homosexuals, they will tell you the same thing. The idea of a single monogamous relationship is completely foreign to their culture.
And a single monogamous relationship is exactly what is needed for society. Some have argued that we need the "diversity" that homosexual behavior brings to our society and that we need to be "tolerant" of others people's views. They compare the struggle for "equality" of homosexuals to that of the civil rights movement of the sixties for underprivileged minorities. None of these arguments hold up upon closer scrutiny.
Diversity in a community is a wonderful thing. There is a tremendous level of diversity in this world and I think America would do well to continue to take what it finds to be the best of all cultures around the world and incorporate it into her own. This very process is what makes America the greatest country in the world. But that doesn't include indiscriminately accepting the worst of other cultures as well. It would be like sitting down at a table covered with succulent meats, lush fresh fruits and vegetables, as well as delicately and carefully prepared dishes from all over the world. Then you are presented with a plate covered with rotten beef covered in worms with putrid cabbage and molding pastas and you are told that with everything else, you must eat this plate as well in order to be appreciate "diversity." Suddenly the idea of accepting anything and everything doesn't make as much sense.
The same goes for tolerance. Tolerating other ideas and ways of thinking is very important in order to learn and grow. But tolerance also involves being able to then make decisions once you are presented with different ideas and then choose. It involves acknowledging rights and wrongs and being willing to examine one's own views but not throw them out with each new idea presented. Society must NOT be tolerant of some types of behavior. We must not tolerate drunks behind the wheel of a car. We must not tolerate people injecting themselves with certain types of drugs or people having sex with as many people as they want when they have communicable diseases. Society puts limits on tolerance out of self-preservation. We simply cannot tolerate everything. A completely open and tolerant culture is one that is on the road to social suicide.
Finally, the argument that the struggle for "equality" by homosexuals before the law being analogous to the civil rights movement is simply absurd. First of all, people who are homosexual in nature ARE equal before the law. There is nothing that separates them from everyone else. There is nothing legally discriminatory about the laws the way they are now. What homosexuals are seeking is to be considered FAVORED in the eyes of the law by seeking to change the nature of marriage so that they can receive the same benefits as married couples. They are seeking to change the very basis upon which society exists. They want the benefits of the privilege (marriage is a privilege NOT a right) without adhering to the boundaries of the institution.
As for its comparison to racism, racism is irrational. Hating a person for the color of their skin is hating a person for what they were born with, not for their actions. Opposition to homosexuality is not opposition to biology, it is opposition to a trend in society that attacks the very roots of who were are as a people. In a racist society, a person of another colored skin could never do anything to achieve equal status. People who have homosexual tendancies, however, have a very real and active choice in how they are treated and ultimately define how people treat them based on their actions.
Allowing homosexuals to sanction their unholy unions and call them "marriage" leads towards the dissolution of marriage in any definable form. If homosexuals are allowed to be married, what stops people from practicing polygamy? What stops men marrying animals, from people marrying their next of kin? Since the definition is tampered with, you can change it to fit anything you want.
What concerns me even more than the idea of condoning homosexual unions is allowing them to raise children in their homes. More than anything, I think this is the greatest evil. Children need a stable home with a mother and a father that were born with the respective plumbing. Children need role models who are both masculine and feminine and exemplify what those things mean. Children need a father who is male, a mother who is female. They need both parents who love them and are faithful to each other. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE. Any tampering with this formula is doing evil against the child and should only be resorted to under the greatest of duress, not out of personal decision. That is how nature works, how society has always properly worked, and if you'll allow me to use a religious reference (God forbid we should in a nation of the 1st Amendment) it is how God has always wanted us to be.
After all that has been written here, I want to say that I am not proporting violence against homosexuals. I don't believe in legislation against sodomy or persecution of adults who choose to practice it. I DO believe that as a society we should discouarage it through the media, education and cultural groups just as we discouarge other types of socially destructive behavior like alcoholism and drug use. But I don't think we should drive them out. And I don't believe we should order our police into anyone's bedroom as long as consenting adults are the only ones in that room .
My conclusion is that homosexuality is wrong but should be tolerated among consenting adults. Changing the laws to allow homosexuals favored status comparable to married couples before the law is wrong and should not be tolerated. People practicing homosexuality should niether be allowed to call their unions "marriage" nor should they be allowed to adopt children. I am taking a stand here and believe these things with all my heart. I say these things with love towards everyone and hate towards no one. Our society must stand upon some principle or it will fall without a foundation. And whoever among our society's leaders are willing to take a stand with me, it is they who I will follow.
