Some thoughts on same-sex marriages

In 1972, activists representing 495 U.S. homosexual organizations gathered in Chicago to develop a "gay stance for the 1972 elections." Included in the published demands is "Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit; and the extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless of sex or numbers."

Although in 1972 their demands seemed so outlandish that nobody took them seriously, their activists have been extremely focused and relentless in achieving their goals.

By 2006, Lesbian Bisexual Gay and Transgender (LBGT) organizations decided they had won so much of their basic nondiscrimination demands that the discussion had to go to a completely new level in order to "shock" the general voters.

The result was a fully funded 15-year strategy to win marriage equality by changing the political climate in ways which will force politicians to support "gay rights."

We see the results of this in Illinois. Homosexual activists and their supporters are again pressing to legalize homosexual marriage in Illinois. In order to render his bill palatable, Rep. Greg Harris changed the language of his bill from "marriage" to "civil unions," and it appears it will now pass.

Intent upon financial support available from homosexual activists, our politicians ignore the costs imposed upon society by homosexuality. Those costs are known, and it is simple dereliction of duty when our elected representatives ignore them. For example, a recent report estimates a minimum $112 billion annual taxpayer cost from high rates of divorce and unmarried childbearing. (See "The Taxpayer Costs of Divorce and Unwed Childbearing: First-Ever Estimates for the Nation and All 50 States," released on April 15th at the National Press Club.) And yes, as that 1972 list of homosexual goals makes very obvious, destruction of marriage is one of them, no matter how activists try to hide it.

Other than normalization of homosexuality, the only reason for the drive for homosexual "marriage" is found in the phrase, "extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit." They want society to pay for the very high medical costs associated with homosexual activity. All other benefits are easily available to everyone by existing legal procedures.

Emmit Lehman

Grayslake