Homosexual Marriage?

People get married for myriad reasons. Why? Because they can. This however does not change the definition of marriage. Marriage has long historical roots, and just because people in western society have stretched its supposed meaning in the last sixty years, doesn’t mean that it can be stretched into complete absurdity by encompassing contractual agreements between homosexuals. Marriage in its most historical sense is about children. It is about the physical act between a man and a woman that produces children, the reliability of that joining, and an agreement on the part of the man to share responsibility for those children that come from that joining. A woman carries the child for nine months and is thus intimately connected to the child; a man does not and is not. Developing between a man and a child, the same type of connection between mother and child requires that the man stays around and interacts with the child. Without time and interaction the man does not develop a bond with the child: a bond the mother already has at birth. This bond between mother and child compels the mother to put the needs of the child above her own, married or not. Marriage is the contract that compels the man to hang around long enough to develop a similar bond. Not only is it an obvious fact, but one also now proven by research, that a child does better with a mother and a father, than in any other type of situation. A child gets certain things from a male that it cannot get from a female. The converse is unimportant, because the mother will stick around regardless. Besides validating the legitimacy of the child the primary reason for marriage is to compel the man to stick around so that the offspring will receive the benefits of him doing so. The primary function of a homosexual “marriage” is to legitimize their relationship; the primary function of a heterosexual marriage is to legitimize the relationship between the father and the child. It is the erroneous perception that marriage serves the same basic function in a homosexual joining as it does in a heterosexual joining that allows for the suggestion that homosexual should be allowed to marry, when in fact homosexuals cannot fulfill the conditions of marriage. To allow homosexual union to be called marriage, is to invalidate any legitimate meaning of the word. Other contractual agreements that allow homosexual unions to have equal legitimacy to marriage in terms of benefit to the partner can be legitimized by the state should the populace wish it to be so, but regardless of the outcome, the word marriage should never be used to describe it.