Yesterday I discussed Religion v Government in regards to marriage. Today we will dive deeper into that subject because we cannot discuss Heterosexual v Homosexual without bringing in Religion v Government. When I sit down and break the debate into each individual argument I become less overwhelmed with the data and facts v. fiction. Considering of course that this is my blog I am going to write it in a way that makes it easier for me to understand. So we are gonna go argument by argument. What started out as a simple discussion about marriage with a friend turned into me doing research which in turn became what I thought would be a one day blog. With the overwhelming amount of individual arguments this has now become possibly a week long blog adventure.
Let’s Dive In….
Today’s argument is: Homosexuals are less committed to a relationship than Heterosexuals
No matter how you phrase it monogamy, duration of relationship, fidelity or commitment they all represent the same thing. They all represent the same argument. This argument is repeated more than any other argument I have found. Yes, even mentioned more than the Bible.
The first question that came to mind when I read this argument is: How can homosexuals be as committed as heterosexuals if they are not allowed to marry? My second question was how can some use the the above listed words to make multiple reasons against same-sex marriage when they mean the same thing?
We must first remember that homosexual and bisexual are different. It would be more difficult for a bisexual person to be in a monogamist relationship, but not impossible. Bisexuals want to be with both sexes as where homosexuals just want to be with the same sex. I believe when people look at the homosexual lifestyle they are viewing the bisexual lifestyle. For example <2>:
Imagine coming home to see your spouse heading out the door saying "Love you loads honey, got to go see the boy(girl)friend now." How does that make your creaky heterosexual bones feel? Does that feel like the commitment you went to the altar for?
The above example is occurring without allowing same-sex marriages. Heterosexual married couples have been involved in threesomes, swinging, wife swaps and open marriages for centuries. The choice in being married has not been taken away from heterosexuals because of these acts. In fact as long as the couple agrees with the choices that they are making then no one bothers giving them a second glance. As long as the couple, whether heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual, agree to it they have the right to participate in these acts. I have met multiple heterosexual married couples who have participated in at least one if not more of these acts. They claim to be in a monogamist relationship that chose to spice up their love life. It’s not cheating or breaking vows if they agree to it right?
Another example of how it is believed that homosexuals are less committed is <3>:
"If homosexuals and lesbians truly desired the same kind of commitment signified by marriage, then one would expect them to take advantage of the opportunity to enter into civil unions or registered partnerships."{25} This would provide them with legal recognition as well as legal rights. However, it is clear that few homosexuals and lesbians have chosen to take advantage of these various unions (same-sex marriage, civil unions, domestic partnerships), suggesting a difference in commitment compared with married couples.
Most states do not allow these various unions so this statement is only truly in regards to the few states that do allow it. If heterosexual couples had been told all of their lives they could not be joined in such unions, some having family members disagree with the union, and had to constantly defend their relationship causing stress in their relationship do you honestly believe they would jump at the first chance to take advantage of these various unions? I know I wouldn’t. I would give those closest to me time to adjust to the fact that I can have those various unions, give my relationship time to settle from the other stress, and most of all make sure I am ready. We are always telling couples to slow down, make sure this is the one you want to be with forever, and of course my favorite we need time to plan a wedding. Just because not all homosexual couples have rushed to the alter does not mean they are less committed. It simply means they won’t be rushed.
I won’t go into the statistics being used to prove this argument, because the ones that actually listed their references used statistics for homosexuals from a completely different time period than the heterosexual statistics or only used statistics for one of the sexual orientations and not both. If we are going to prove an argument based upon statistics then let us use the same survey for both groups, and do the survey at the same time for both groups.
Well this has been fun. Please feel free to comment with your opinion or questions, but remember PG-13 and respect. Tomorrow’s argument we are going to discuss two arguments in one because I believe they really add up to the same thing: Marriages are for family orientated and homosexuals cannot procreate or provide an optimum environment in which to raise children.
Let’s Dive In….
Today’s argument is: Homosexuals are less committed to a relationship than Heterosexuals
No matter how you phrase it monogamy, duration of relationship, fidelity or commitment they all represent the same thing. They all represent the same argument. This argument is repeated more than any other argument I have found. Yes, even mentioned more than the Bible.
The first question that came to mind when I read this argument is: How can homosexuals be as committed as heterosexuals if they are not allowed to marry? My second question was how can some use the the above listed words to make multiple reasons against same-sex marriage when they mean the same thing?
We must first remember that homosexual and bisexual are different. It would be more difficult for a bisexual person to be in a monogamist relationship, but not impossible. Bisexuals want to be with both sexes as where homosexuals just want to be with the same sex. I believe when people look at the homosexual lifestyle they are viewing the bisexual lifestyle. For example <2>:
Imagine coming home to see your spouse heading out the door saying "Love you loads honey, got to go see the boy(girl)friend now." How does that make your creaky heterosexual bones feel? Does that feel like the commitment you went to the altar for?
The above example is occurring without allowing same-sex marriages. Heterosexual married couples have been involved in threesomes, swinging, wife swaps and open marriages for centuries. The choice in being married has not been taken away from heterosexuals because of these acts. In fact as long as the couple agrees with the choices that they are making then no one bothers giving them a second glance. As long as the couple, whether heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual, agree to it they have the right to participate in these acts. I have met multiple heterosexual married couples who have participated in at least one if not more of these acts. They claim to be in a monogamist relationship that chose to spice up their love life. It’s not cheating or breaking vows if they agree to it right?
Another example of how it is believed that homosexuals are less committed is <3>:
"If homosexuals and lesbians truly desired the same kind of commitment signified by marriage, then one would expect them to take advantage of the opportunity to enter into civil unions or registered partnerships."{25} This would provide them with legal recognition as well as legal rights. However, it is clear that few homosexuals and lesbians have chosen to take advantage of these various unions (same-sex marriage, civil unions, domestic partnerships), suggesting a difference in commitment compared with married couples.
Most states do not allow these various unions so this statement is only truly in regards to the few states that do allow it. If heterosexual couples had been told all of their lives they could not be joined in such unions, some having family members disagree with the union, and had to constantly defend their relationship causing stress in their relationship do you honestly believe they would jump at the first chance to take advantage of these various unions? I know I wouldn’t. I would give those closest to me time to adjust to the fact that I can have those various unions, give my relationship time to settle from the other stress, and most of all make sure I am ready. We are always telling couples to slow down, make sure this is the one you want to be with forever, and of course my favorite we need time to plan a wedding. Just because not all homosexual couples have rushed to the alter does not mean they are less committed. It simply means they won’t be rushed.
I won’t go into the statistics being used to prove this argument, because the ones that actually listed their references used statistics for homosexuals from a completely different time period than the heterosexual statistics or only used statistics for one of the sexual orientations and not both. If we are going to prove an argument based upon statistics then let us use the same survey for both groups, and do the survey at the same time for both groups.
Well this has been fun. Please feel free to comment with your opinion or questions, but remember PG-13 and respect. Tomorrow’s argument we are going to discuss two arguments in one because I believe they really add up to the same thing: Marriages are for family orientated and homosexuals cannot procreate or provide an optimum environment in which to raise children.