Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wish we would get Government out of Marriage and vice versa. Then this issue wouldn't exist. Secular Civil Contracts for everyone, Marriage is for Churches, Synagogues, families etc...
But a civil marriage license IS a secular civil contract.
despite what some would have us believe, a man can not be a woman, and a woman can not be a man.
therefore, a woman can not be a father: The Importance of a Father's Role
Seeing the important and complementary roles that both my wife and i play in raising our children, i can never imagine having the Gaul to proclaim to the mother's of the world that I, being the bastion of enlightment that I am, would be able to replace their role as nurturer of the family.
Yet some here have no such apprehension, and liberally insult fathers as being an optional member of the family unit. Devolution, thy name is a test tube.
The entrenched conviction that children need both a mother and a father inflames culture wars over single motherhood, divorce, gay marriage, and gay parenting. Research to date, however, does not support this claim. Contrary to popular belief, studies have not shown that "compared to all other family forms, families headed by married, biological parents are best for children" (Popenoe, quoted in Center for Marriage and Family, p. 1).
Research has not identified any gender-exclusive parenting abilities (with the partial exception of lactation). Our analysis confirms an emerging consensus among prominent researchers of fathering and child development. The third edition of Lamb's (1997) authoritative anthology directly reversed the inaugural volume's premise when it concluded that "very little about the gender of the parent seems to be distinctly important" (p. 10). Likewise, in Fatherneed, Pruett (2000), a prominent advocate of involved fathering, confided, "I also now realize that most of the enduring parental skills are probably, in the end, not dependent on gender" (p. 18).
"Overall, the belief that children of lesbian and gayparents suffer deficits in personal development has no empirical foundation. .....
The results of some studies suggest that lesbian mothers' and gay fathers' parenting skills may be superior to those of matched heterosexual couples. For instance, Flaks, Fischer, Masterpasqua, and Joseph (1995) reported that lesbian couples' parenting awareness skills were stronger than those of heterosexual couples. This was attributed to greater parenting awareness among lesbian nonbiological mothers than among heterosexual fathers. In one study, Brewaeys and her colleagues (1997) likewise reported more favorable patterns of parent-child interaction among lesbian as compared to heterosexual parents, but in another, they found greater similarities (Vanfraussen, Ponjaert-Kristoffersen, & Brewaeys, 2003)."
But a civil marriage license IS a secular civil contract.
Exactly, I went to the courthouse and got a marriage license. This gave the bride to be and myself certain legal rights and obligations. It is a legal document.
I was also married by a Roman Catholic priest. Here the obligation is to our spouse and God.
If marriage was inherently of a sacred nature then heterosexual atheists should not be getting married.
the reasoning is that the Supreme Court has ruled that marriage supports happiness, and the Declaration of Independence guarantees everyone the pursuit of happiness.. period..
All other personal reasons is secondary to the legal argument that gays should be allowed to marry so they can be happy.
I agree 100%. Kudos! They do the same duties: work, pay taxes, serve on juries, etc. They deserve the same rights.
I never said that a same sex couple could not have the same equal rights of a married couple. What I did say is-it should not be labeled marriage. Have the same legal rights and call it an union.
The title of the law is irrelevant to access to the law. It's not my problem that you're sensitive about what lawmakers decided to title a law.
However, I'll gladly join you in an effort to change the name of the law. Give me equal access to marriage law today, and tomorrow we can start a movement to rename civil marriage anything you want.
Using the Government to violate the will of people over a small lifestyle group is wrong, and it's not something that should ''normalized '' by society. It's not a healthy lifestyle.
It's not that long ago that the "will of the people" supported the legal prohibition of interracial marriage. Was it wrong to use the Government and the Supreme Court to violate the will of the people in Loving v. Virginia?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
