Prop 8 is an initiative constitution amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman.
When I examine propositions, I visit five of the major newspapers (San Diego Union-Tribune, Los Angeles Times, San Jose Mercury News, San Francisco Chronicle and Sacramento Bee) of California to see what they have to say in addition to my own consideration, conversation with others and checking out other sources with opinions on the matter.
All 5 newspaper editorial boards are in agreement. On this proposition, they all are opposed and I believe they are all wrong.
The San Diego Union-Tribune argues this way:
With gay marriage a fait accompli, society has not crumbled. The long-standing institution of marriage is not in crisis. Californians have taken this change in stride. Indeed, there appears to be a marked shift in public opinion toward acceptance of gay marriage.
Words have to have meaning.
This is not like choosing Coke or Pepsi; a matter of taste.
Redefining a societal institution is a serious matter.
Marriage has been understood to be between one man and one woman for eons and is the foundation of civilization.
Koukl offers this explanation (emphasis mine):
Marriage begins a family. The purpose of family is to produce the next generation. Therefore, family is designed by nature for children. This description alone is consistent with our deepest intuitions, which is why every culture since the birth of time has recognized this. No other characterization fits what societies have been doing for millennia.
Families may fail to produce children, either by choice or by accident, but they are about children, nonetheless. That’s why marriages have always been between men and women; they are the only ones, in the natural state, who have kids.
Government has no interest in affirming any other kind of relationship. It privileges and sustains marriage in order to protect the future of civilization.
Same-sex marriage is radically revisionist. It severs family from its roots, eviscerates marriage of any normative content, and robs children of a mother and a father. This must not happen.
I urge a Yes vote on Prop 8.
-
UPDATE: Wind farm greenlighted by Dept. of Interior . Really didn't know what tag to put on this item. Economics? Politics? Cultur...
-
Am looking at Matthew 13:31-32 tonight. Jesus again illustrated the Kingdom of Heaven with an agricultural image. The kingdom is like a tiny...
-
Am mesmerized by John Coltrane's jazzy version of My Favorite Things . Thus, it was natural to use that as a basis for planning my birt...
1 comment:
this is an awsome post. thank you! (I'd love it if you would post it as a comment to my last blog post)
Children have a right to a mom and a dad. The state of California allowing same-gender marriage may seem progressive to some– –but what it says to me is that the state of California sanctions a relationship that does not best serve children.
While no heterosexual parents are perfect, and some situations are down right abusive and traumatic, the response is not to eliminate a child’s right to a mom and a dad. The response is to better educate, better encourage, better help parents be better.
While a lesbian couple or a gay couple may provide a stable home, love, and support to a child. By definition, a same-gender marriage cannot provide them a mom and a dad. Every child has the right to a mom and a dad.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/feb/06021601.html
Society should sacrifice for the health and well being of its children.
This is why I am voting “yes” on prop 8 (on my absentee ballot).
http://prop8discussion.wordpress.com/category/legislation-and-social-issues/
yes on prop 8!
Post a Comment