That would not be the case if society's norms remained static. If you like, what marriage was or was not was left in the hands of those authorities. To do so would be entirely selfish I feel Then we can get back to fighting over resources, history, xenophobia, political ideology and the arrogance of our political leaders instead, just like we always have but more recently hiding these motivations behind the excuse of religion. Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion, cited Loving v.
I oppose same-sex marriage (and no, I'm not a bigot)
Trying to convince anyone on this issue is a rather wasted effort. Proudly powered by WordPress. This deluded man cannot be blamed for the culture he has adopted. They should be happy with that, just so long as they can't have what I have! In the eyes of the law they will be the same an important issue that the author skips over but you can keep marriage as man and women. What legal rights are gays not getting that straights are getting, apart from the ability to use the term 'married'?
Same-Sex Marriage and Interracial Marriage: Not the Same Thing | Public Discourse
The first recorded interracial marriage in American history was the celebrated marriage of the daughter of a Powhatan chief and an English tobacco planter in In every country where same sex marriage has been legalised there has followed a raft of law suites against anyone that does not want to participate in a gay marriage from marriage celebrants and religious leaders to venue operators and even wedding cake bakers. If conservative Catholic Ireland can do it, I am sure we can. Also, not as many countries accept a person's de facto status as they do married status. Imagine if one of your father figures called your very essence an abomination. Quite seriously I have had a gut full. In their landmark ruling, Loving v.
This abolitionist drawing from the s suggests the plight of the enslaved children of white masters, depicting a nearly-white slave and her mother pleading not to be sold. Don't think this can happen? A religious person who finds such unions contradict her faith should pause before entering into one, but she has no good reason for stopping other people from doing so. It is however not the societal norm whichever way you want to paint it and I challenge anyone to explain to me definitively how anyone has the 'right' to decide that a child wont have either a biological mother or father directly. Founding Myth, Foundational Rejection The first recorded interracial marriage in American history was the celebrated marriage of the daughter of a Powhatan chief and an English tobacco planter in The second reason the parallel between opposing same-sex marriage and opposing interracial marriage is invalid is that opposition to marriage between races is a moral aberration while opposition to marrying a person of the same sex is the moral norm. Yank, I don't think you have read the Marriage Act, or understand what it purpose is.