From time to time I have listened to interviews with advocates of the homosexual marriage movement, and each of these advocates has emphatically denied that they were in favor of anything other than the union of two adults in a committed, loving relationship. Someone would always ask the obvious question, "If you change the definition of marriage to include two persons of the same sex, where will it end?" The homosexual marriage advocate would always act as though the person asking the question were being unreasonable or even foolish.
This seemed disingenuous to me. After all, it's common knowledge that NAMBLA members routinely participate in pro-homosexual-rights rallies and marches. It's also common knowledge that the typical homosexual leads a lifestyle that is anything but monogamous.
As it turns out, at least one of the groups that is pushing for homosexual marriage openly admits that the cause does not end with the union of two adults in a committed, loving relationship. On the contrary, in their organization's statement they affirm that "Committed, loving households in which there is more than one conjugal partner" as well as "Queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households" should enjoy all of the same legal privileges and benefits as a married couple. Indeed, it appears that they would like to push the envelope much further: "Our vision is the creation of communities in which we are encouraged to explore the widest range of non-exploitive, non-abusive possibilities in love, gender, desire and sex". I wonder who will determine what is "non-exploitive" and "non-abusive"... NAMBLA perhaps?
I hate to think of my children having to go through life and raise their children in the kind of world that these activists are working to create. Polls consistently show that the majority of Americans are in agreement with me on this one - and yet relatively few politicians are doing much of anything to resist the homosexual activists. I think that we all need to keep on top of our elected officials and make sure that they know we're paying attention, and we want them to represent us. (For those readers who are not Americans: if you are able to have a voice in your country's political process, then use it for good.)
Vive la differénce!
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I'll keep on my elected officials, and keep my cynicism to myself; it's the least I can do. I don't want anyone to accuse me of not doing the least I could do...
I'm often filled with dismay as I observe how many people don't do the least they could do... or something like that. Regarding your political cynicism: I sympathize. And truly, in the final analysis, unless the political leaders (and the people in general) have a change of heart, we won't really accomplish any lasting good by pestering the politicians.
Post a Comment