New Zealand is on track to remove barriers to same sex marriages. We have Civil Union legislation, but this is a sort of half-way house thing. Removing an arbitrary sex based barrier to marriage is of it’s time.
However those of the faith and the religiosity have got their collective underpants all bunched and they’re going to come out swinging on a number of ‘points’.
And they are all nonsense. And they are all nonsense because there is not one logical argument that could be put forward that would or could justify their position. Not a one.
“Marriage is between a man and women” Since when? Since a when the ‘church’ decided to Ponce up some ceremony and add some bells and whistles is a when. The church is big on dogma and protocol. But I can’t find any evidence that before the church decided to dress up a ceremony that marriage wasn’t a thing. I can’t find any evidence that before the church decided to restrict it’s ‘blessing’ that all marriages were between men and women.
Historically then a marriage was a means to ensure a continuance. That is all. If you had not confirmed or announced partner then you had no estate to pass. Marriage brought with it some assurances.The churches brought with it dogma, and protocol and restriction.
Largely, same-sex practice is a topic of little interest to the Biblical authors.
It beggars belief that you would refer to an ancient book of myth and stories to cherry pick what your faith is. Sure the Bible might say “husband” and “wife” but it doesn’t as far as I know define the gender of either in terms of what constitutes a “marriage”.
The restriction or constriction is therefore one made up by the church and religion as a method of control.
Children
In New Zealand we have out share of conservative doom-sayers
I don’t mind having it on record that the idea of two men having responsibility for a child is a little beyond me. I couldn’t do it. I assisted with a more maternal and capable mother in raising our children from birth. But I am talking about baby children, not toddlers, or schoolers, or teens. I don’t have the same doubt about females raising children. Call me a bigot if you like, but I have first hand experience of a woman raising our child and she did a great job. I’d hire her again
I have no idea what feeling or compulsions you have a person in relation to children and your level of altruism in wanting to look after, nurture and care for a child. I just don’t.
I have my understanding. I have an idea of what is acceptable and required from my experience, and I have the insight from a number of people who I’ve associated with who’ve raised children. I have experience.
Just because I don’t think I could does not mean I don’t think you should. It might make you shudder, cringe and gasp. It doesn’t mean that you can’t raise a child as a parent. To have any other position on this indicates you live your life in a cave. There are lots of children raised by single parents. There are heaps raised by same sex parents, mostly female I’d wager.
The world did not stop when Elton John and David Furness adopted a child. Money makes it better or acceptable? Get a grip.
Related articles
- Key will back early stages of gay marriage bill (radionz.co.nz)
- Same sex marriage bill delights gay community (radionz.co.nz)
- Gay marriage to be legalised in Scotland despite two thirds of people opposing change (telegraph.co.uk)
- Gay marriage in Scotland is a ‘dangerous experiment’, says Catholic Church (independent.co.uk)
It’s disappointing that the U.S. is not the only place engaged in this ridiculous debate. It’s encouraging, however, to see that the logic the explains away the stupidity of the anti-gay marriage crowd has no borders. By the way, there’s actually plenty of evidence of “marriages” between men centuries ago.
I believe there is quite a bit of evidence to be fair, I was discussing this with someone recently, and they were saying that it was mostly to do with retention of estate.
I’m winging it but somehow I feel we’re still paying for the prudishness of the Victorian era.
Don’t be so quick to discount those Victorians – they were a rowdy bunch.(LOL)
You make a lot of sense and good point – wish more people were more open-minded — who are we to tell other people how to live and what choices to make?