Gay people should not be allowed to access IVF (3 Viewers)

[HumanDichotomy]

This is by a guy called Dan Savage:

THERE were community meetings in Seattle on Wednesday. Some of the couples who had sued to overturn Washington’s ban on same-sex marriage, a case they lost before the state’s Supreme Court earlier that day, were going to appear. Gay and straight elected officials who support “marriage equality” were going to make speeches. I probably should have been there too.

But I had a previous engagement.

The Seattle Mariners were playing the Toronto Blue Jays at Safeco Field. My 8-year-old son — adopted at birth by my boyfriend and me — loves the M’s almost as much as he hates the way a breaking news story can keep me late at work. He would never have forgiven me for skipping the game.

I didn’t feel too bad about missing the meetings. Washington’s high court rejected same-sex marriage for much the same reason the New York Court of Appeals did earlier this month. The speeches in Seattle would no doubt be similar to those made in New York, and I didn’t need to hear them again.

Basically, both courts found that marriage is like a box of Trix: It’s for kids.

In New York, the court ruled in effect that irresponsible heterosexuals often have children by accident — we gay couples, in contrast, cannot get drunk and adopt in one night — so the state can reserve marriage rights for heterosexuals in order to coerce them into taking care of their offspring. Without the promise of gift registries and rehearsal dinners, it seems, many more newborns in New York would be found in trash cans.

At least the New York court acknowledged that many same-sex couples have children. Washington’s judges went out of their way to make ours disappear, finding that “limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples furthers procreation, essential to the survival of the human race, and furthers the well-being of children by encouraging families where children are reared in homes headed by the children’s biological parents.” Children, the decision continues, “tend to thrive in families consisting of a father, mother and their biological children.’’

A concurring opinion gave the knife a few leisurely twists: due to the “binary biological nature of marriage,” it read, only opposite-sex couples are capable of “responsible child rearing.”

These stunning statements fly in the face of the evidence about gay and lesbian parents presented to the court. Similar evidence persuaded the high court in Arkansas to overturn that state’s ban on gay and lesbian foster parents.

What the New York and Washington opinions share — besides a willful disregard for equal protection clauses in both state Constitutions — is a heartless lack of concern for the rights of the hundreds of thousands of children being raised by same-sex couples.

Even if gay couples who adopt are more stable, as New York found, don’t their children need the security and protections that the court believes marriage affords children? And even if heterosexual sex is essential to the survival of the human race (a point I’m willing to concede), it’s hard to see how preventing gay couples from marrying increases heterosexual activity. (“Keep breeding, heterosexuals,” the Washington State Supreme Court in effect shouted, “To bed! To bed! To bed!”) Both courts have found that my son’s parents have no right to marry, but what of my son’s right to have married parents?

A perverse cruelty characterizes both decisions. The courts ruled, essentially, that making my child’s life less secure somehow makes the life of a child with straight parents more secure. Both courts found that making heterosexual couples stable requires keeping homosexual couples vulnerable. And the courts seemed to agree that heterosexuals can hardly be bothered to have children at all — or once they’ve had them, can hardly be bothered to care for them — unless marriage rights are reserved exclusively for heterosexuals. And the religious right accuses gays and lesbians of seeking “special rights.”

Even if you believe that marriage plays a special role in the lives of heterosexuals with children (another point I’m happy to concede), can it not play a similar role in the lives of homosexual couples, whether they’re parents or not? Marriage, after all, is not reserved for couples with children. (Perhaps it will be soon, if courts keep heading in this direction.)

When my widowed grandfather remarried in his 60’s, he wasn’t seeking to further the well-being of his children, who were grown and out of the house. He was seeking the security, companionship and legal rights that marriage provides. The survival of humankind was the furthest thing from his mind.

These defeats have demoralized supporters of gay marriage, but I see a silver lining. If heterosexual instability and the link between heterosexual sex and human reproduction are the best arguments opponents of same-sex marriage can muster, I can’t help but feel that our side must be winning. Insulting heterosexuals and discriminating against children with same-sex parents may score the other side a few runs, but these strategies won’t win the game.

So I’m confident that one day my son will live in a country that allows his parents to marry. His parents are already married, as far as he’s concerned, as my boyfriend and I tied the knot in Canada more than a year and a half ago. We recognize, even if the courts do not, that it’s in his best interest for us to be married.

And while Wednesday was a dark day, the M’s beat the Blue Jays 7 to 4, so it wasn’t a total loss.

Dan Savage is the editor of The Stranger, a Seattle newsweekly

 

[Tangent]

This is by a guy called Dan Savage:

That makes me wanna throw myself of a bridge. Really, how demoralising, and they are scrapping at the bottom of the barrel for excuses! Aust. will prob look to them for precedent too

 

[brittanica-]

Born equal

yes exactly and homosexuals are BORN GAY
get it? they were born like that therefore we are all equal in the eyes of god
so just because their gay doesnt mean that they are going to rot in hell you idiot

you will for being so close minded and for treating "gods children" with little respect and equality that they deserve!

 

[SnowFox]

This is by a guy called Dan Savage:

I've read this before, but it was from a different author who was female and based in New York.

 

[JonathanM]

Aborted foetuses of lesbian couples of Middle-Eastern background should not be allowed to vote.

Discuss.

 

[Iron]

yes exactly and homosexuals are BORN GAY
get it? they were born like that therefore we are all equal in the eyes of god
so just because their gay doesnt mean that they are going to rot in hell you idiot

you will for being so close minded and for treating "gods children" with little respect and equality that they deserve!

Born with gay feelings maybe, not with the sin of gay actions. The choice to fight and resist is theirs

 

[brittanica-]

Born with gay feelings maybe, not with the sin of gay actions. The choice to fight and resist is theirs

exactly and arent we givent he choice to be happy
therefore that was our god given right! so stop being narrow minded
do you suppress your feeluings to be happy???
i think not so stop pressing inequality on society because your not happy with the way god made some people!

 

[Iron]

Ofc I suppress my 'feelings to be happy'? Everyone does everyday. Sometimes i'd like to murder or secks or rob total randoms, but I dont bc i accept that these fleeting desires are far from God-given rights

 

[Tangent]

Ofc I suppress my 'feelings to be happy'? Everyone does everyday. Sometimes i'd like to murder or secks or rob total randoms, but I dont bc i accept that these fleeting desires are far from God-given rights

You only resist the urge because God tells you to?

 

[HumanDichotomy]

Ofc I suppress my 'feelings to be happy'? Everyone does everyday. Sometimes i'd like to murder or secks or rob total randoms, but I dont bc i accept that these fleeting desires are far from God-given rights

But homosexual 'desires' are not 'fleeting'. The urge to be close to someone emotionally, sexually and physically is pervasive for almost everyone once they've passed puberty, whether gay or straight.

 

[brittanica-]

Ofc I suppress my 'feelings to be happy'? Everyone does everyday. Sometimes i'd like to murder or secks or rob total randoms, but I dont bc i accept that these fleeting desires are far from God-given rights

yes but when did being happy with a person wether being of the same sex or not become placed in the same category of murder?
last time i checked being in love with someone did not cause the implications of murder, robbery or secks? whatever secks are
i didnt think that being in love and happy repulsed people to the extent it obviously does to you iron

 

[HumanDichotomy]

Iron has difficulty understanding how homosexual people could be in a happy and loving relationship...he doesn't consider it *true* happiness or love.

 

[Iron]

It is a similarly revolting act, as some have alluded to, because it is inherently closed to family and the srs business of life. It is a mockery of true love

 

[HumanDichotomy]

It is a similarly revolting act, as some have alluded to, because it is inherently closed to family and the srs business of life. It is a mockery of true love

And you would be speaking from personal experience?

 

[Iheartgays]

And you would be speaking from personal experience?

Would you be?

 

[pedobear]

It is a similarly revolting act, as some have alluded to, because it is inherently closed to family and the srs business of life. It is a mockery of true love

'Grats on your mastery of the english language. I just thought I'd bag out your poor sentence structure before I bagged on you for your piece of shit opinion.

I can begin to see where people who reject homosexuality are coming from when they are considering the religious side of things (for example and even though I disagree), but where do you get off preaching to everyone about what love is or isn't?

And you would be speaking from personal experience?

I hardly think that his personal experience is relevant; it's nothing more than a matter of possessing the empathy which Iron obviously lacks.

Would you be?

/agree, considering you think that you need to be gay in order to understand gaylove.

 

[HumanDichotomy]

I hardly think that his personal experience is relevant; it's nothing more than a matter of possessing the empathy which Iron obviously lacks.

I was being sarcastic, implying that he has neither personal experience, nor empathy.

Also:

There are many factors that can cause a person to be homophobic. Research has shown that prejudice against gay people and homosexuality can be influenced by the person:

Having strong religious beliefs that disapprove of sex and/or homosexuality

Having little/no social contact with lesbian and gay people

Reporting no homosexual experiences or feelings

From Prejudice & Attitudes to Gay Men & Lesbians - Homophobia

 

[Garygaz]

Or the idea of a man's penis in another man's arse disgusts you.

 

[Tangent]

Or the idea of a man's penis in another man's arse disgusts you.

Lots of people find that disgusting, though you have to ask yourself why. Is there really a reason?

 

[Iron]

hahahaha