Marriage, for the sake of society, must be between a man and a woman
Marriage, California Style
Oh, those wacky California judges! In the same way you cannot abrogate gravity or the law of thermodynamics, you cannot totally ignore the central core of all societies, the role of marriage and family.
This not a screed about homosexuality. I am not a child. I know that some people are born wired to be sexually attracted to their own, not the opposite sex. I have known many homosexuals in my life and most of them have not appeared to be that happy with the hand they were dealt.
I even was pleased when various laws were changed to remove the onus of criminality from something over which homosexuals have no choice except to hope they will find a measure of acceptance among their family and friends.
I do not, however, believe that the law should sanction gay marriage. Domestic unions that extend equal protection, yes, but marriage, no.
Marriage, for the sake of society, must be between a man and a woman. It is about procreation. It is about the maintenance of family and that means the care of children.
Lesbians, of course, can have children. They can raise children, but they do so without a male figure in the household; something called a father. California judges may argue that there are many single mothers raising children, but that child has a father somewhere that society and the law says has an obligation to provide support.
Little girls need fathers. Little boys need fathers. Providing them with two mothers or two fathers dilutes the necessity of the fundamental family unit, one mother and one father.
I am told that polls show that some sixty percent or more Californians oppose gay marriage, but when courts feel free to ignore public opinion, particularly when it is rooted in history that goes back beyond even early civilizations, you end up with bad decisions.
I do not know, nor care, what legal justification the California court found for extending the right of marriage to homosexuals, but there is simply no justification. That truth is based on millennia in which the bond between a man and woman has been sanctified by nature, religion, law, practice, and common sense.
It is the reason the traditional marriage ceremony has always begun with the question, “Do you take this woman?” and “Do you take this man?”
Legalizing marriage between homosexuals is just one step away from legalizing polygamy and other practices that undermine society. It discredits marriage still further in a society that already has a divorce rate somewhere in the area of fifty percent. It weakens an already weak society that is filled with children deprived of the security of parents, a mother and father, whose mutual focus is their welfare and their future.
Ordinary people understand this. Why can’t the courts of California?
| 
