- Parent's Topics
- Adoption
- Advice & Education
- Community Support
- Dads
- Entertainment
- Family & Friends
- Foster Care
- Gear & Gifts
- Insemination
- Just For Fun
- Legal & Financial
- Moms
- News & Politics
- Surrogacy
- Travel & Vacations
Actor and liberal voice Alec Baldwin recently blogged about the faulty logic used by those who preach against marriage equality. His most recent piece on The Huffington Post offers obvious rationale for gay marriage:
"One perspective, however, keeps coming back at me. Fundamentalists believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and for the purpose of creating a family. A gay couple is incapable of having their own children, they assert, so they do not qualify to be married. But what of heterosexual couples who marry with no intention of having children. Beyond any issues of infertility or illness, there are men and women who are married in the eyes of the state, enjoying all of the legal benefits, who have no intention of having children. They seek only companionship and all of the entitlements that come with marriage. Sex, joy, partnership, caring. All of that is theirs, even though they will never bear children and willfully so. If the state says they are free to do that, why aren't gay couples, as well."
Comments
RE: Alec Baldwin makes sense about marriage equality.
I think there should be a clearer meaning for marriage. I think a unioun between a couple that can procreate should be a marriage and a union between a couple that cannot or won't procreate be called a civil union. Both instances should the rights be the same. Only marriage is reserved for the religous and used in church and a civil union can be done anywhere. This would make the controversy clear irregardless of the sex or sexual preference of the people in question.