I have some questions/comments about Michael J. Smith's Fence Post of Feb. 21, "Same-sex marriage bad for society." You indicate that the purpose of marriage is to provide a stable family structure for children, which prompts some questions:
What tests would you suggest be imposed on opposite-sex couples to ensure that they would provide a stable environment? The divorce rate and incidence of child abuse and neglect would indicate that we heteros are not providing a uniformly stable family structure.
Since you indicate that the purpose of marriage is to procreate, should there be a fertility test prior to the issuance of a marriage license? Should infertile couples be forced to separate so that the fertile one can be mated to someone else who is fertile (and will you pay for my divorce since I had to have a hysterectomy within a couple of months of my wedding)?
You indicate that adoption is not a natural way of creating a family; should adoption be banned altogether?
You say that single gender households are not the "optimum" way to raise children; should widows/widowers have their children removed so the children can exercise their "right" to both a mother and a father?
I suspect many who read this will say that I've taken these arguments to ridiculous extremes. Have I? I'm simply applying your arguments against same-sex unions to opposite-sex unions. I do agree with you on one point, however. Rather than redefining marriage, the state should get out of the marriage business and everyone should get civil union certificates from the state. If you want to take it further and "sanctify" it within the strictures of your religion, that's your option; the state doesn't need to be involved.
CarpentersvilleCopyright © 2014 Paddock Publications, Inc. All rights reserved.