12 ms·

The opponents of gay marriage will tell you that the consequences of gay marriage is adoption, and that raising a child without both parents is a bigger violenc

by mam2 6y ago

The opponents of gay marriage will tell you that the consequences of gay marriage is adoption, and that raising a child without both parents is a bigger violence for this child than any sort of physical violence. I disagree personally with this point of view, but you really need to start understanding the opposite point of view to understand that at the end of the day, both parties feel they fight a legitimate cause...

dragonwriter 6y ago
> The opponents of gay marriage will tell you that the consequences of gay marriage is adoption No, while the opponents of same-sex marriage also oppose adoption by same-sex couples, by far the vast majority of them will argue that the primary basis for opposition is either that marriage is intended to produce offspring and same-sex marriage is defective in that regard or that marriage is a divine institution instituted for heterosexuality and that extending it same-sex couples defies the divine plan, improperly endorses homosexuality, and pollutes society with sin independently of whether or not this is further compounded by allowing such couples to adopt.
mcphage 6y ago
> The opponents of gay marriage will tell you that the consequences of gay marriage is adoption, and that raising a child without both parents is a bigger violence for this child than any sort of physical violence. I don't even know what the first one means—"the consequence of gay marriage is adoption"? > both parties feel they fight a legitimate cause I agree that both parties feel like their cause is legitimate, but it does not follow that both causes are equally legitimate. For instance, if you remember a few years back, Cheerios had a commercial with an interracial couple, and they got a lot of complaints about it. I don't think anybody said that the people complaining didn't feel passionately that their cause was legitimate. However, that fact does not mean that others need to treat that cause as equal in legitimacy to the cause that people of different races may marry, and those marriages may be displayed in commercials. And absolutely, there are cases where both sides are legitimate. But we do not need to treat all cases like that, even if some are. We don't need to be full-on cultural relativists.

by mam2 6y ago

dragonwriter 6y ago

> The opponents of gay marriage will tell you that the consequences of gay marriage is adoption No, while the opponents of same-sex marriage also oppose adoption by same-sex couples, by far the vast majority of them will argue that the primary basis for opposition is either that marriage is intended to produce offspring and same-sex marriage is defective in that regard or that marriage is a divine institution instituted for heterosexuality and that extending it same-sex couples defies the divine plan, improperly endorses homosexuality, and pollutes society with sin independently of whether or not this is further compounded by allowing such couples to adopt.

mcphage 6y ago

> The opponents of gay marriage will tell you that the consequences of gay marriage is adoption, and that raising a child without both parents is a bigger violence for this child than any sort of physical violence. I don't even know what the first one means—"the consequence of gay marriage is adoption"? > both parties feel they fight a legitimate cause I agree that both parties feel like their cause is legitimate, but it does not follow that both causes are equally legitimate. For instance, if you remember a few years back, Cheerios had a commercial with an interracial couple, and they got a lot of complaints about it. I don't think anybody said that the people complaining didn't feel passionately that their cause was legitimate. However, that fact does not mean that others need to treat that cause as equal in legitimacy to the cause that people of different races may marry, and those marriages may be displayed in commercials. And absolutely, there are cases where both sides are legitimate. But we do not need to treat all cases like that, even if some are. We don't need to be full-on cultural relativists.