Goal is to expand definition of marriage

Make text smaller Make text larger


Dear Sir,

The argument against same-gender marriage that says “marriage is between a man and a woman” is not really an argument at all because no one is suggesting that marriage be taken away from men and women.

The goal is to expand the definition so that consenting adults can decide who to marry on their own, instead of being dictated to by the Government and religious organisations.

My son is the product of two same-gender loving (SGL) people, proving that the ways in which people decide to have children is not dependent on marriage, which is essentially a civil contract between two people.

Right now, that contract is between one man and one woman, but it wasn’t always that way. The composition of marriage has evolved throughout history and should continue to evolve today.

The constant attempts by anti-marriage equality proponents to somehow insinuate that marriage equality is harmful to children neglects the multitude of studies that prove this is wrong, and also disregards that same-gender loving people have healthy, well-adjusted and successful children, too.

In my humble opinion, the distaste for the assumed sexual acts of non-heterosexuals has always been and continues to be the driving force behind the refusal to allow marriage equality.

To sum it up, they are basically saying, “The kind of sex I imagine you having is yucky, therefore you are yucky and don’t deserve the same rights I have”.

For the most part, those of us who are SGL and transgender were raised in heterosexual households with marriage upheld as the golden ticket to a happy life.

Many of us had no idea that we were not heterosexual or cisgender back then, and we still have the memories, morals and values that we grew up with that include marriage as something good that we should strive to attain.

When we do come out as gay/same-gender loving, all of a sudden people expect us to forget about the dreams that we grew up with, as if our sexual orientation and desire for equality makes our existence a nightmare.

We, your children, relatives, friends, neighbours and co-workers, deserve the same rights and protections that you enjoy; anything less is separate and unequal.

I have asked many times for proof that my marriage negatively affects heterosexual marriage, I have yet to hear an answer that makes logical sense. I guess I’ll have to wait ...

C. JOHN

You must be registered or signed-in to post comment or to vote.

Published Dec 7, 2015 at 8:00 am (Updated Dec 7, 2015 at 12:10 am)

Goal is to expand definition of marriage

What you
Need to
Know
1. For a smooth experience with our commenting system we recommend that you use Internet Explorer 10 or higher, Firefox or Chrome Browsers. Additionally please clear both your browser's cache and cookies - How do I clear my cache and cookies?
2. Please respect the use of this community forum and its users.
3. Any poster that insults, threatens or verbally abuses another member, uses defamatory language, or deliberately disrupts discussions will be banned.
4. Users who violate the Terms of Service or any commenting rules will be banned.
5. Please stay on topic. "Trolling" to incite emotional responses and disrupt conversations will be deleted.
6. To understand further what is and isn't allowed and the actions we may take, please read our Terms of Service
7. To report breaches of the Terms of Service use the flag icon

  • Take Our Poll

    Today's Obituaries