Let's see how they do with their arguments (my comments will be highlighted).
Myth #1: Having same-sex couples celebrate their love does nothing to harm anybody else’s marriage or damage the institution of marriage.
The argument that “what I do is my business and doesn’t hurt anybody but me” is an old argument that has been refuted in numerous ways. Not that we're going to go into them here. The institution of marriage has existed throughout history in almost every culture to protect women and children. Actually, it's existed mostly to codify transfer of property, and has not been a great protection for either women or children. Marriage is already under attack from a promiscuous, me-centered culture that derides any male who “gives up” his rights for altruistic reasons and labels him a “powerless wimp.” Likewise, women who “hold out” for marriage are called “prudes” and worse. How does this have anything to do with the 'myth' at all? As for marriage being under attack, how come divorce is highest in the bible belt states and among evangelical christians? These cultural changes are bad enough. Society opens the floodgates of cultural destruction if marriage becomes meaningless. That assumes that gays being able to marry makes it meaningless, it's very meaningful to my cousin John and his husband. Counterfeits always devalue the real thing. Counterfeit marriage will lead to “anything goes” unions. But only you think its counterfeit, plus that's a snowball argument. There will be no legal reason to deny anyone the umbrella of “marriage.” The age of those seeking unions will be irrelevant; their blood relationship won’t matter; the number of partners seeking the ceremony or any other characteristic will become meaningless. Really? Why? I'd love to see a source for this assertion. The whole institution of marriage will be rendered irrelevant. Just look at Scandinavia: they legalized “same-sex marriage”; now, cohabitation rather than marriage is the prevalent household arrangement. Actually, their marriage rate was decreasing long before that, and recently... it's gone back up. And blood relatives, children, and animals aren't getting married there either.
Myth #2: Same-sex “marriage” is an “equal rights” issue.
Activists argue that same-sex “marriage” is like the civil rights issue of racial equality, that homosexuals “deserve” the right to “marry” and have the same benefits and protections of marriage that heterosexuals enjoy. Any denial of that “right,” they say, violates their “equal rights.” The reality is that the same-sex “marriage” effort is more about getting society’s approval for behavior; it is not about benefits or protections. On your say so.. all the gay people I know say it's about being able to get benefits and protections. All American citizens have the right to marriage, and all the protections that homosexuals seek are already embedded in American law. This argument would have also worked against interracial marriage, claiming that people have an equal right to marry anyone of their own race. This is a ridiculous argument that only makes sense to fanatics. Anyone can legally designate beneficiaries and establish who can or cannot visit them in hospitals. Actually, a number of states have DOMA laws that make it so that you cannot establish those legal beneficiaries. Also, try telling that to Janice Langbehn.Clearly the push is for approval, mainstreaming an aberrant set of values, and condoning certain behaviors; it is not for establishing “rights” that already exist. Saying 'clearly' does not actually make it clear. Marriage is more than a “legal” institution; it is an institution supported by society as a haven for children, the foundation of the family, and the well-spring of civility and national strength.That's your opinion. Legally, it's just another form of contract. The homosexual activists are seeking a special right, one that denies the human truth that male and female are designed to be “one” and are created as the natural means for propagating the human race. Ah, that old saw. And what about seniors who marry, or people who can't have children, or just people who don't want to have children?
Myth #3: Any group of people — including homosexual couples — can contribute to the well-being of children and form a productive unit of society.
Conveying marital status to any group of people gives them societal affirmation and establishes them as an essential element of society when the research indicates they are not capable of performing those functions. Source?Social science research sends a clear and unequivocal message: the married couple, mom-and-dad family is best for children — not just good, but best in comparison to any other household arrangement. Source? Recent studies have shown that children of gay parents do just as well (and in some areas better) than children of straight parents. It's children of broken families that do less well. But I don't see you trying to outlaw divorce... Other households (headed by anyone other than the married mother and father) are far inferior and damaging to children’s well-being and their futures. Already our children are at risk from the increase in cohabitation and the decline in marriage. If we add same-sex “marriage” into the mix, we are disregarding the best interests of our nation’s children. You mean like the children languishing in our foster care systems? Per capita, gay couples are more likely to take in these children than straight couples. American children are at risk in carefully-documented ways when they are raised in any household but a married mom-and-dad family: They make worse grades, are likely to drop out of school, more prone to getting into trouble, have greater health problems, are more likely to experiment with drugs and/or alcohol, and will likely engage in early sexual activity and thus be more likely to contract a sexually-transmitted disease, have an abortion(s) and/or teen pregnancy. Source. Seriously. And something that has been done since the middle of the last century where anything but the nuclear family was suffering under the added turmoil of dealing with constant
Myth #4: Same-sex “marriage” is a matter of freedom of conscience and freedom of religion.
This is one of the more insidious myths related to “same-sex marriage.” There is no way to ignore the fact that same-sex “marriage” violates the deeply-held beliefs of millions of Christian, Jewish, and Muslim citizens whose opposition to same-sex “marriage” is founded on central tenets of their faith. I'm sorry, but for something to be a central tenet of a faith, it has to be more than 1% of your holy book Y'all spend a lot more money on this than other central tenets like 'don't steal'. Knowing this, the homosexual activists are working through indoctrination programs for the nation’s children. Our public schools are becoming the means through which activists plan to change public opinion and the rule of law. Curriculum programs are instilling the idea that there is no legitimate opposition to homosexuality; instead, any opposition is bigoted and hate-filled. Laws are being changed to force innkeepers, businesses, and even our social services to celebrate homosexuality. No, not celebrate it. Just treat it the same way that you do heterosexuality.
More to the point, same-sex “marriage” is already used to bludgeon religious liberties and drive out Christian social services. One recent example: Massachusetts and the District of Columbia have both driven out Catholic adoption agencies, whose moral stand is unacceptable to the homosexual agenda. They didn't drive them out, and certainly not intentionally. However if the Catholic Church is going to pick and choose which tenets to follow (for instance, they'll adopt out children to previously divorced couples, a sin that Jesus himself spoke against and he didn't mention thing one about homosexuality) then they'll have to pay the piper. Frankly, a religious group shouldn't be in charge of government social services ANYWAY so good riddance. The radical politics of homosexuality requires orphans to remain without parents at all rather than to allow a Christian agency the religious liberty to find them a home.And apparently the Catholic Church would rather restrict a child to being held in an orphanage than place them with a loving, caring family. WWJD indeed... And again to point out that you didn't actually disprove this 'myth' because you only argued from the point of your conscience and religion, without accepting that there are others that are different from yours.
Myth #5: “Same-Sex Marriages” are just like heterosexual marriages.
This last myth is probably the one furthest from the truth. In actuality, homosexual unions have a very short lifespan; many of the same-sex “marriages” in Massachusetts are already being dissolved. So are many of the heterosexual marriages that happened in Mass. in that period I would bet as well. People who marry in a rush (for instance, because they want to get it done before the right is taken away, or perhaps caught in a heady rush of celebration... like in Vegas?) tend to divorce pretty quickly too. How is this different from straight marriage? Further, the health risks associated with homosexual practice are very real and very much in evidence in the emergency rooms of hospitals. There is no denying: Homosexual sex is dangerous and destructive to the human body. Both HIV and HPV are epidemic among homosexual men. By this they mean anal sex, which not all homosexual men take part in, and there's no mention of lesbian sex which is much less of a risk. And HPV is epidemic among pretty much everyone. Domestic violence is a common problem — twice as prevalent among homosexual couples as in heterosexual ones. Source? Though if true, perhaps part of that is due to stresses due to being treated unequally by society, as well as a lack of access to psychological support as well as a lack of societal and familial teaching because the previous generation of homosexual people tended to have family issues related to their sexual orientation. Indeed, legally creating a union does not enable two men or two women to become “one flesh,” nor does a legal ceremony give the union sanctity. Neither does a strictly civil marriage between straight people, but you're not making those illegal are you? And what about churches/religions that DO believe that gay marriages are equal in sanctity to straight marriages? You're infringing on their rights! Instead, the ceremony creates a sham that will devalue all marriages. How? It doesn't devalue my marriage. Your marriage must have very little value.The government establishes “standards” for measurement and value; to declare a sham union equal to marriage would devalue the “standard” and render all unions worthless and irrelevant. If the U.S. government establishes same-sex “marriages” under law, it will be redefining marriage — completely and irrevocably. You mean like when divorce became legal? Or when women were able to give their own vows and sign their own marriage contracts? Or when men were no longer allowed to marry more than one woman? Or when marriage ceased to be "a man and woman becoming one person, and that person being the husband." Marriage has gone through a lot of changes. Such a powerful statement will contradict the prevailing social science research: Source?There is a big difference between 1) a family created and sanctioned by society when a man and a woman commit to each other and thus form a cohesive unit, and 2) a couple or group of people who live together to form a household in defiance of the prevailing moral codes to render meaningless an institution that has been the bulwark of the family and society throughout history. Except through equal rights being allowed, a married gay couple moves from being under the #2 scenario to being under the #1 scenario... And every year, more and more people are of the opinion that marriage is a human right not restricted by sexual orientation. 65% of incoming freshmen approve of gay marriage. Nearly a quarter of freshmen who described themselves as social conservatives support gay marriage! Same Sex marriages more and more are in fact considered a family sanctioned by society. This is circular logic. Same sex marriage is wrong because it's not accepted, and we have to make sure that it isn't accepted because it's wrong.
