Last night I saw a blog post on a Catholic blog that appeared to lay out an unbiased look at same-sex marriage- well homosexual marriage in the vernacular of that type of site. it was one of those most interesting types of posts where the writer believes they are being quite fair, but in the end, there can be no homosexual marriage.
It is just simply that men and women together are the people who create other people. No matter how much sympathy I have for gay people, no matter how completely I agree with many of their concerns, the fact is that homosexual unions are sterile. They do not make other people. (emphasis is mine)
So, here is my reply to the post:
Your comments about identified homosexuals who could perform as heterosexuals is problematic. Sexual orientation and behavior are not one in the same, and behavior is not based even partly on the ” same-sex attraction was so profound.” Such an idea is pure garbage.
Sexual Orientation is understood scientifically to be fluid and exist upon a spectrum running from exclusively heterosexual to exclusively homosexual. In between these two ends of the spectrum are the majortity of people who are some amount of bisexual. Even those whose orientation is exclusively homosexual can perform with a member of the opposite sex. Stimulation is stimulation. I believe the more appropriate idea is that some people are able to compartmentalize their orientation and adhere to social and gender constructions, where as others feel no need to supress their orientation.
Your argument against same-sex unions- that they are sterile and do not make humans is flawed on several levels.
1) Heterosexual couples may be sterile, and yet we, as a civil government do not refuse to issue them marriage licenses. In other words, access to Civil Marriage is not based on the ability to make babies.
2) Same-sex couples have and raise children all the time and deserve the same legal protections for their families as opposite sex couples. My closest friend was married and had two children before getting a divorce. Then a number of years later, she came to realize that she was a lesbian. She and her partner have been together about 15 years and raised the children. As a couple one partner can not impregnate the other, but that doesn’t make them any less of a family.
3) Same-sex couples use many of the same options that are available to opposite-sex couples such as surrogacy, adoption, fertility medicine, sperm donation, etc. Since opposite sex couples use these techniques to start a family, why are these not equally valid within same-sex couples?
4) But the biggest flaw in your argument is that people are not breeders. Human beings are not like many mammals who go into heat, and by hormones alone find a mate and “breed.” In fact the term “breeder” to describe heterosexuals is pejorative! Yet that is the basis of your argument? Love, intimacy, family, and sex are all complex parts of being human, and it is offensive to think of marriage as being about animal husbandry albiet human animal.
There is no such thing as homosexual marriage or heterosexual marriage. But there are same-sex couples and opposite sex couples, and all of them can and do form loving, committed and meaningful relationships and families. ALL of those families deserve the legal protections that Civil Marriage affords. For example, my partner and I have been together for over 16 years, and even though both of our names are on our house deed, if one of us would die, the other would be forced to pay taxes on the other’s half of the property which would not be the same if one of us was a different gender. That is unfair! The ability to make a baby has nothing to do with fairness.
There have been since recorded time, and in all cultures persons who experienced same-sex attraction, and there always will because sexual orientation is a naturally occurring part of the human experience. There will always be heterosexual people and there will always be babies born. Granting same-sex couples the right to receive a civil marriage license will not harm that in any way. In fact, allowing same-sex couples the right to Civil Marriage will only strengthen the institution of marriage and help families.
PS: to Ted Seeber- there is no greater amount of promiscuity in homosexuals than in heterosexuals! The proof of this is evident in the number of out-of-wedlock births and the number of births that happen less than nine months following a wedding. Heterosexuals are extremely promiscuous, and always have been! Even in the 1950s, the so-called “golden era” of perfect families, there were tons and tons of shot gun weddings! Breeders are promiscuous! As I mentioned before my partner and I have been in a loving committed relationship for over 16 years! Because as a society we have had no way to measure or record same-sex commitment, is it easy for people to accuse gays of being promiscuous, and it is an undeserved accusation!
There is only one rational argument against same-sex marriage, and that is a theological one. Some people of Faith believe it is a sin. But our Civil Government issues marriage licenses, not the Church, so this alone is no reason to keep same-sex couples from marrying. As for God, I will happily stand before my Maker and proudly own that I have been in a loving committed relationship with my partner for so many years. I think God will approve, even if some human beings think otherwise. If YOU feel it is against YOUR religious beliefs for two same-sex people to marry, then no one will force YOU to marry a person of the same-sex! But don’t force your theology upon my partner and I who are a loving and committed couple. My Civil Marriage won’t strop you getting into heaven!