Re: For Those Opposing Gay Marriage: Answer This One Question: How Does It Affect You
I might take it further in that successful marriage per-se reduces drop-out rates, juvenile crime, and similar.
IMO, divorce has a genuine sociological cost, so therefore marriage has a genuine sociological benefit, and therefore affects everyone.
I don't necessarily disagree with you on that, but I would qualify that by pointing out divorce between couples with children has a genuine sociological cost, but if the couple has no children, there is no cost.
This is a different issue, though, since current law has no stipulations about family formation being a requirement of marriage.
Further, if we want to reduce the genuine societal costs of divorce, we should make more stringent rules guiding divorces where there are children involved. Perhaps requiring waiting periods and marriage counseling for those seeking divorce when they have children together (or even in general, as is done in many European countries).
I lose respect for "gay rights" when people say it only affects the people getting married, as that point of view doesn't even allow for how marriage affects the children of the married couple.
The marriage of people without children does not affect children, though.
If straight couples are allowed to get married without stipulation regarding children, then gay couples should be as well, IMO.
If the gay couple chooses to have children (through adoption or other means), then the same rules should apply to them as would straight couples.
Marriage without children has no real benefit to society, nor is there any legitimate detraction from society due to it, regardless of the genders of the marriage participants.
If we as a society want to make marriage a valuable tradition again, as well as being equally applied, then we should either:
A) Make a stipulation regarding having children within the first five years of marriage or the benefits of marriage cease (regardless of the gender of the marriage participants)
OR
B) Make divorces much more difficult for those married couples that do have children (again regardless of the genders of the marriage participants)
In either of these scenarios, we would actively seek to improve society based on the beneficial societal impacts of marriage, and not on arbitrary distinctions of the participants of marriage. Personally, I'd be in favor of the second option over the first because other factors could be in action preventing procreation within the given time-span.
Just thought I'd pop in and say "hi" and wish walleye a good time on his two week vacation. Now, there seem to be a few, here that would still like to discuss the topic. I hope the next time I log on, I see that. If not, I'll leave the thread to the Basement. And, any intentional act to further taint this thread, will be met with a similar fate as to what happened to walleye.
