FA+
Shop
Politics, Gay Marriage, and my quest to drive myself crazy.
14 years ago
General
WARNING: POLITICS AHEAD!!!!!!
Normally I don't like politics, but recently I have been getting involved in discussions in the comments of
CigarSkunk's journals. CigarSkunk's views are far far ever so far right of center, but that not really relevant to what I have to post.
In one of the discussions a question came to mind; what is the right's reasoning for the opposition of homosexual marriage. So I asked, and haven't gotten a response yet. However, I did some digging and found this: http://tech.mit.edu/V124/N5/kolasinski.5c.html
Basically it argues that a married couple are eligible for many government subsidies intended to promote the raising of children in order to keep the birth rate up. If homosexual marriage is legalized it would open up homosexual couples to receive those benefits, thus taking money from the state with out the state gaining any benefit. He also acknowledged that a homosexual couple could still raise children, but cites a sociological study that points out the impotence of having both a female and male parent.
This is one of only arguments I have found that doesn't boil down to "gays are icky" or "because <insert holy text here> said so." And to be honest, I think it has a valid points. However I have a couple of comments.
1) With talks of budget cuts and tax increases in the United States, it is very reasonable to think that these marriage benefits, with maybe the exception of social security and joint health insurance, would only go into effect after the birth or the final adoption of a child. It would save taxpayers money, and at the same time increase the amount of money many people pay in taxes, generating revenue.
2) While there may be an importance to having both a male and female parent, is that impotence more or less damaging then living in foster home after foster home or in an orphanage. Could having a small population of people raised in a same sex environmental contribute to the diversity of ideas and experiences in the United States? I think homosexual parenting is a very open area of debate.
Discuss if you want, I just found it to be a very interesting argument.
Normally I don't like politics, but recently I have been getting involved in discussions in the comments of
CigarSkunk's journals. CigarSkunk's views are far far ever so far right of center, but that not really relevant to what I have to post. In one of the discussions a question came to mind; what is the right's reasoning for the opposition of homosexual marriage. So I asked, and haven't gotten a response yet. However, I did some digging and found this: http://tech.mit.edu/V124/N5/kolasinski.5c.html
Basically it argues that a married couple are eligible for many government subsidies intended to promote the raising of children in order to keep the birth rate up. If homosexual marriage is legalized it would open up homosexual couples to receive those benefits, thus taking money from the state with out the state gaining any benefit. He also acknowledged that a homosexual couple could still raise children, but cites a sociological study that points out the impotence of having both a female and male parent.
This is one of only arguments I have found that doesn't boil down to "gays are icky" or "because <insert holy text here> said so." And to be honest, I think it has a valid points. However I have a couple of comments.
1) With talks of budget cuts and tax increases in the United States, it is very reasonable to think that these marriage benefits, with maybe the exception of social security and joint health insurance, would only go into effect after the birth or the final adoption of a child. It would save taxpayers money, and at the same time increase the amount of money many people pay in taxes, generating revenue.
2) While there may be an importance to having both a male and female parent, is that impotence more or less damaging then living in foster home after foster home or in an orphanage. Could having a small population of people raised in a same sex environmental contribute to the diversity of ideas and experiences in the United States? I think homosexual parenting is a very open area of debate.
Discuss if you want, I just found it to be a very interesting argument.
