4 ms·

When gays talk about how they are being discriminated against by being prevented from equal rights of marriage that straight people have, I think this is kind o

When gays talk about how they are being discriminated against by being prevented from equal rights of marriage that straight people have, I think this is kind of a 'me too' knee jerk reaction and I dont think most gays have put any thought into what marriage really is. Marriage is not just a man and woman committed to living together in a monogamous relationship, thats nothing more than a formalized relationship. A marriage is a contract where a man promises to provide for a woman and the children he has with her. Despite all the talk of 'feminism' and 'patriarchy', we live in a society where women still expects the man to provide for a her and the children they have together. Where does this sense of morality come from? There are societies in the world where men are not tied to women and children are raised as part of a community. The fact is that the laws of marriage uphold an idea of the christian family unit. All this hoohaw that gays make about how they can get married too now is really just a cheap shot at gaining benefits for married couples that are designed to offset the huge expense of having children. The vast majority of gays dont have children so this is whole idea of them getting married is just for show and to cash in on money they dont need. Heterosexual men are the providers of the children of this country whether or not they get married due to the child support laws that exist. There is a reason that many countries call the 'marriage' between gays a civil union, because the vast majority of the time thats all it is. These marriage and child support laws are based on christian morality despite how much divorce lawyers would argue that it grew naturally out of some kind of innate sense of justice.

BobNNN 11y ago
So why don't you folks fight for changes in the law to only convey the benefits of marriage to couples with children? Surely you'd include gay couples in that if you did, right?
- BradCantrell 11y ago
  Thats exactly what is GOING to happen, there is going to have to be legal separation between married couple with and without children. In the past there were financial benefits given to everyone who was married rather than waiting till they have children to encourage couples to have children. Also because in western culture we are raised with the idea that a man will support a woman so she can stay in the home whether or not they have kids. All these implicit assumptions are gone now that gays are married. Gay couples are much more likely to be self-sufficient and not have one partner who relies on the other. When a heterosexual couple divorces, the wife takes half even though most often she did not contribute financially to the marriage because there is an implicit idea here that the man is providing ALL the financial support in the relationship. Tax and work benefits also make this assumption and so now we are going to have a lot of gays trying to cash in on all these marriage benefits even though they are most usually not supporting their spouse nor ever going to have children. These issues did not come up in the past because there were hardly any married gays, but now that gay marriage is federally legal you are going to see more legal and statistical definitions distinguishing between marriages where a spouse supports their significant other and possibly children and and marriages who dont. Guess what, you are going to find that 95% of the time that gays fall into the second category.

BobNNN 11y ago

So why don't you folks fight for changes in the law to only convey the benefits of marriage to couples with children? Surely you'd include gay couples in that if you did, right?

BradCantrell 11y ago
Thats exactly what is GOING to happen, there is going to have to be legal separation between married couple with and without children. In the past there were financial benefits given to everyone who was married rather than waiting till they have children to encourage couples to have children. Also because in western culture we are raised with the idea that a man will support a woman so she can stay in the home whether or not they have kids. All these implicit assumptions are gone now that gays are married. Gay couples are much more likely to be self-sufficient and not have one partner who relies on the other. When a heterosexual couple divorces, the wife takes half even though most often she did not contribute financially to the marriage because there is an implicit idea here that the man is providing ALL the financial support in the relationship. Tax and work benefits also make this assumption and so now we are going to have a lot of gays trying to cash in on all these marriage benefits even though they are most usually not supporting their spouse nor ever going to have children. These issues did not come up in the past because there were hardly any married gays, but now that gay marriage is federally legal you are going to see more legal and statistical definitions distinguishing between marriages where a spouse supports their significant other and possibly children and and marriages who dont. Guess what, you are going to find that 95% of the time that gays fall into the second category.