Currently many have argued limiting marriage to the opposite sex is discriminatory prohibiting “everyone” to marry. However, the most universal element present in di-hybrid species of both animal and humans are the two sexes of male and female, (with very few defective exceptions). Even in human society, with its vastness of sub-differences that exist among people, the two sexes are always present in every, race, ethnicity, social, economic, continent, primitive, and non-primitive, and so on. Since Roman times marriages had been form with elements of segregation to keep social class, race, religion and pure bloods from intermingling with one another “dirtying societies race, social, or religious structures.”
With time, the realization that such segregation is not only unjust but also unneeded marriage would purge its self of all forms of segregation. In an attempt to help keep this universalism or inclusivity the safeguard of requiring the opposite sexes for marriage remained due to the universality and inclusive nature.
Under the concept of “marriage equality,” the universal diversity of marriage (which was inherent in the presence of all genders being required for the act) is being eliminated for a segregationist criteria so that some social groups may request to opted out of the universal inclusion of people of all genders for an exclusionary centric marriage were each marries [i]“only your own[/i]”.
“Marriage equality”, either intentionally or unintentional excludes one of the sexes form the union of same sex. Lesbian marriages only incorporate two women; Gay marriages only incorporate two men. Each union denies the presents of the opposite sex to be in either union, unlike opposed sex marriage which requires it. The segregation in “marriage equality” is based solely on one’s sexual preferences; preferences that are not set in stone but can change at the behest of what the individual feels like from one day to the next. If we look at what is the defining characteristic of these unions? Rather than being gender-integrated as true marriage is, they are segregated by gender.
The homosexual community in short is asking for marriage to be a discriminatory institution once more by having the “right” to refuse the opposite gender from the union. Same sex unions do not give respect to the opposite sex and or acknowledge the diversity of the sexes and what they bring to not only the union but to a relationship and in the razing of children. By arguing the necessary inclusion of the opposite sex in to the marriage union is violation of their desire to exclude the opposite sex.
Those who are in the “marriage equality” camp go one to render the opposite sex person a mere object (not unlike slavery did with African Americans) in their egocentric quest for emotional satisfaction by means of playing parent to children. In this way Gay men proceed to denigrate women by viewing her importance to their relationship according to her reproductive anatomy to be bought and sold for use at their behest. Requesting that any personal bond of mother and child that occurs naturally be denied (and even going so far as to sue for that denial in several cases where the mother decided to keep the baby and return the money). After the birth she is to have no insight, say, or rights to the child in its development. She is to be denied the dignity of womanhood, motherhood, and parentage so that it may be “given” to another who paid for it. Her sole role is to produce the baby, (i.e. Baby factory). For Lesbians, the male is even more objectified because it is only his sperm that is needed and nothing more. Once more denying him the dignity of manhood, fatherhood, and parentage to satisfy the emotional desire of one who paid for it. To convey dignity to that which does not act dignified we take the dignity of women and men by treating them as incubation and insemination tools akin to an Easy Bake Oven and a Turkey Baster.
Let us not forget the objectification of the children. No longer are children embraced as the resultant manifestation of the expression of love whenever they may arrive. Instead they are objects to satisfy the emotional desires of “parents” who bought and paid for them. Consideration is not given to the importance of the sexes in the development of a child or even to the child’s rights by nature to experience and benefit from the contributions made by parents of both sexes. Just as with the adults any dignity which was belonging to the child shall be taken in order to convey dignity to the undignified. They child is no longer a being in its own right, rather it is an item to be purchased (adopted) or created (IVF or surrogacy) at the leisure and whim of the parents; not for the child, but to grant the homosexual the dignity of parentage with a flesh doll rather than a fake doll we give to children to play parent with; as an object to satisfy our desire rather than a being to which we are obliged to respect and dignity.
The word Equally in this new form of marriage needs to be changed to marriage segregation. Legal recognition of same sex marriage is recognition of the right of a group (sex) to exclude another (sex) because they desire to do so; and to then further discriminate by dehumanizing men/women and their contribution to the marital relationship as husband/wife, the rearing of children as father/mother to the dignified task of inseminator and incubator (what we all wanted to be when we grow up). While also dehumanizing children to instruments of emotional satisfaction.
Furthermore the Supreme Court ruling endeavoring to eliminate second class status from same sex couples serves to create second-class citizens out of single, co-habitating or non-married person who are denied equal dignity and security as well as economic and legal power afforded to the married class.
How is this the road to equality and dignity when all it does is scream segregation and dehumanization?
With time, the realization that such segregation is not only unjust but also unneeded marriage would purge its self of all forms of segregation. In an attempt to help keep this universalism or inclusivity the safeguard of requiring the opposite sexes for marriage remained due to the universality and inclusive nature.
Under the concept of “marriage equality,” the universal diversity of marriage (which was inherent in the presence of all genders being required for the act) is being eliminated for a segregationist criteria so that some social groups may request to opted out of the universal inclusion of people of all genders for an exclusionary centric marriage were each marries [i]“only your own[/i]”.
“Marriage equality”, either intentionally or unintentional excludes one of the sexes form the union of same sex. Lesbian marriages only incorporate two women; Gay marriages only incorporate two men. Each union denies the presents of the opposite sex to be in either union, unlike opposed sex marriage which requires it. The segregation in “marriage equality” is based solely on one’s sexual preferences; preferences that are not set in stone but can change at the behest of what the individual feels like from one day to the next. If we look at what is the defining characteristic of these unions? Rather than being gender-integrated as true marriage is, they are segregated by gender.
The homosexual community in short is asking for marriage to be a discriminatory institution once more by having the “right” to refuse the opposite gender from the union. Same sex unions do not give respect to the opposite sex and or acknowledge the diversity of the sexes and what they bring to not only the union but to a relationship and in the razing of children. By arguing the necessary inclusion of the opposite sex in to the marriage union is violation of their desire to exclude the opposite sex.
Those who are in the “marriage equality” camp go one to render the opposite sex person a mere object (not unlike slavery did with African Americans) in their egocentric quest for emotional satisfaction by means of playing parent to children. In this way Gay men proceed to denigrate women by viewing her importance to their relationship according to her reproductive anatomy to be bought and sold for use at their behest. Requesting that any personal bond of mother and child that occurs naturally be denied (and even going so far as to sue for that denial in several cases where the mother decided to keep the baby and return the money). After the birth she is to have no insight, say, or rights to the child in its development. She is to be denied the dignity of womanhood, motherhood, and parentage so that it may be “given” to another who paid for it. Her sole role is to produce the baby, (i.e. Baby factory). For Lesbians, the male is even more objectified because it is only his sperm that is needed and nothing more. Once more denying him the dignity of manhood, fatherhood, and parentage to satisfy the emotional desire of one who paid for it. To convey dignity to that which does not act dignified we take the dignity of women and men by treating them as incubation and insemination tools akin to an Easy Bake Oven and a Turkey Baster.
Let us not forget the objectification of the children. No longer are children embraced as the resultant manifestation of the expression of love whenever they may arrive. Instead they are objects to satisfy the emotional desires of “parents” who bought and paid for them. Consideration is not given to the importance of the sexes in the development of a child or even to the child’s rights by nature to experience and benefit from the contributions made by parents of both sexes. Just as with the adults any dignity which was belonging to the child shall be taken in order to convey dignity to the undignified. They child is no longer a being in its own right, rather it is an item to be purchased (adopted) or created (IVF or surrogacy) at the leisure and whim of the parents; not for the child, but to grant the homosexual the dignity of parentage with a flesh doll rather than a fake doll we give to children to play parent with; as an object to satisfy our desire rather than a being to which we are obliged to respect and dignity.
The word Equally in this new form of marriage needs to be changed to marriage segregation. Legal recognition of same sex marriage is recognition of the right of a group (sex) to exclude another (sex) because they desire to do so; and to then further discriminate by dehumanizing men/women and their contribution to the marital relationship as husband/wife, the rearing of children as father/mother to the dignified task of inseminator and incubator (what we all wanted to be when we grow up). While also dehumanizing children to instruments of emotional satisfaction.
Furthermore the Supreme Court ruling endeavoring to eliminate second class status from same sex couples serves to create second-class citizens out of single, co-habitating or non-married person who are denied equal dignity and security as well as economic and legal power afforded to the married class.
How is this the road to equality and dignity when all it does is scream segregation and dehumanization?
