PsuedoGhost
Member
- Apr 21, 2006
- 206
- 15
- 16
Hobbit said:The stats on gays and STDs, promiscuity, and increased domestic violence are readily available and have been posted on this board many times. If I were more awake, I'd post them again.
That's the second time I've heard that today... Still waiting to see something that is credible. I've seen the statistics on AIDS prevalence in the Gay and Straight Community, and there seems to be more unprotected sex in the gay community. However if we're gonna start posting stats that state that 70% of gays have had over 1000 partners... Then I'm going to heavily ask for cites. If they are having more unprotected sex then it stands to reason that their incidences of STDs are higher. Interesing I found that the vast majority of AIDS cases are amongst Gay black men... (from the CDC). Or rather the vast majority of new diagnoses.
As for the first part, we could debate welfare for weeks, but let's not. One thing you failed to grasp in the first part of the post is that having gay marriage is not the legalization of an action, except the action of issuing a liscence. The illegal actions are not of the gay people, but of the government officials issuing documents. Right now, gays are free to engage in all acts unique to homosexuality...period. Allowing marriage liscences to be issued to gays is a government endorsement of their lifestyle. It's already allowed. A marriage liscence legalizes no behavior. What it does is grant benefits to the two parties by sheer virture that they are married. The fact that the state recognizes hetero marriage and grants married couples a few concessions is an endorsement of that lifestyle and is intended to promote that lifestyle in America's citizens. The state has several good reasons to endorse that lifestyle, as it benefits society. However, there is no such benefit from endorsing the gay lifestyle. While it would be pretty invasive to outlaw the gay lifestyle, it would also be a tad bit foolish to endorse it.
I realize that it is not the legalization of an act per se. But many such as yourself might view it that way, since you consider it to be immoral (forgive me if I'm overstepping what I'm reading into your words). Many times morality is viewed as legality (for better and worse) so that could lead to the connotation that now that gays are legally allowed to marry, that it is now morally acceptable or something along those lines.
Again, I'd like to remind you that we are discussing gay marriages in respect to the state based unions only. I could care less if the church wants to start recognizing same sex unions etc.
What exactly are the benefits of heterosexual marriage for society?