The normal way our species reproduces is for one man and one woman to join together to produce a pregnancy which results in the birth of a child. A wedding is a natural product of this attraction between a male and a female. Marriage provides love and material support for children.
A primary reason that employers and governments provide family benefits to married couples is to ensure proper care for the children that result from a marriage. Years ago when birth control methods were less reliable and life expectancies were much shorter it was common for women to be involved in child care for much of their married lives.
Two homosexuals cannot bear children from their own union, just between the two of them. They need no family benefits in the sense that traditional married couples do. Gay marriage seems unnecessary.
The attraction that boys and girls feel for one another during and after puberty is much more common than homosexual attraction. And there are apparently several cases of homosexuals becoming heterosexuals. Various groups offer help for homosexuals seeking to voluntarily change their sexual orientation. But many questions remain unanswered. The debate is ongoing over what causes homosexuality and whether it can be altered in many or all cases.
Precedent for Government Limiting Marriage
Some claim that a government has no role in limiting or defining marriage. I disagree. The United States Supreme Court set a precedent for defining a legal marriage more than a century ago by supporting laws against polygamy.
In 1878 the United States Supreme Court decided in the case of George Reynolds vs. the United States that Reynolds’s religious beliefs as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons) did not allow him to violate laws against polygamy. The United Sates laws against polygamy still stand, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has since officially renounced polygamy (supposedly partly due to a divine revelation in 1890).
Homosexual Rights
Rulings in various courts in recent years have guaranteed homosexuals certain rights. I support fairness for homosexuals, but I think rulings that grant gays and lesbians favoritism over persons who are single and celibate are incorrect.
I support allowing two homosexuals to enter various legal documents with one another, just as two other single people can for various purposes while remaining unmarried. And I have met and become friends with persons who are homosexuals. In fact I respect all persons, regardless of their sexual orientation. Gays and lesbians may on average earn higher incomes than heterosexuals, may be more intelligent by standard IQ measures, and can be very caring, compassionate, productive members of society. But I think marriage ought to be defined as between a man and a woman.
In fact, allowing same sex marriage might be a step toward legalizing polygamy, incest, and an “anything goes between two consenting adults” attitude that this writer feels would be far more destructive than constructive. Perhaps my Christian faith biases me, but it is my belief that a homosexual deserves help, friendship, and love, but not a marriage license to a member of the same sex.
Note: This article is very similar to articles the author has previously published on other websites.