Skip to content

Why Gay Marriage? – Part 1: Adoption

August 5, 2012

When it comes to marriage there are some people that would choose to monopolize the very title to religious rights. The idea that Gay-Marraige is somehow the degradation of value to the title, as an institution; and while I cannot say that I was ever against the notion of gay marriage, there was a time when I felt I could see the logic of the claim. There was a time that I too felt that marriage was a religiously spawned concept, and on the grounds of which I did not see the necessity of. However, now as I am older, I have adopted the notion of empathy. I try to see the world through the eyes of others, be it in study and observation, or hypothetical construction. Having done that, I believe that I know why its so important that LBGT marriage become not only legal, but supported.

But in all fairness, let us explore the pros and cons.

Firstly the idea that it is “Wrong

Homosexuality is not mentioned in particular detail in the bible, in fact it is barely mentioned at all. But like all “cherry picking” Christians that choose what to take literally, they have found a line that suits them rather well, and it is sandwiched between various rules in which they completely disregard. This I consider a fantastic hypocrisy.

It doesn’t make sense to me, myself why its “wrong” However, I can see how it can be described as “Abnormal” After all, humans as well as all sexually reproducing creatures do not have an obvious biological utility to facilitate homosexual relations.

But notice that I say “obvious” As it can be argued that the very wiring of our neurology, as being able to facilitate such the romantic and emotional principles; could be alone argued to be “a proper facility” and thus, we are in fact biologically fit to engage in homosexual relations as well as the heterosexual. So for that reason, there is one point to it being a “natural thing” and at best can be considered “Unproductive”

I could even argue that it is a byproduct of our evolution, or rather “higher” evolution. As in, if you look carefully at the core behavior, it seems to be a case of “normal” sexuality, but with a reassignment of affection from the opposite sex, to perhaps a means of more direct relation. So this is “more evolved” so to speak, because it transcends our behavioral instincts that is inherent to our biology. Meaning: We are not a slave to our biological instincts.

From a philosophical point of view, I can recognize that a relationship between two people is in itself something that any god should respect. In that mutual consideration. that mutual affection. In that need to love and be loved in return. It is in that way they look at each other, they way they love beyond the physical notion that is not all too dissimilar from their hetero “brothers and sister” if you will… and it is because of the philosophical notion alone that I so fully endorse and defend their right to love whomever they want, with the only moral stipulation being that they are loved in return.

What good can come Gay-Marriage?

I am somewhat certain that much good can come of gay-Marriage. In fact, I could argue so many points into just how many ways homosexual commitments can in fact benefit and balance society. So I will attempt to describe some of these to you.

  1. First and foremost is “adoption”:

    There are children whom are born and for whatever reason are unwanted. It might be hard for some of you to imagine a child being unwanted. It might be hard for some of you to imagine it being a christian that would do this. However, give it enough thought, you might realize that some mothers will not abort because of religious conviction, and adoption is one of those “suggestions” that are made.

homosexual partnerships do not have the luxury of producing biological offspring, despite their desire to do so, as per their biological and psychological mechanism. For this reason adoption is good for them as well as the rest of us because they are part of a substantial population and present a vacuole for raising children within a financially and socially stable household.

The commitment of marriage gay or straight is the entrance of a “partnership” A lasting partnership that allows for a greater ability to raise children in the monetary aspect; as in being able to sustain a greater income to be able to support them.

It may come as a surprise to you, but a great number of single parents are in fact on programs such as “WIC” and government subsidized welfare; which includes food stamps, section 8, and etc… So on that matter alone, such adoptions are likely to prove helpful to the taxpayers as well. See, even you fundies get to win.

Aside from the financial aspect, children raised in LGBT partnerships are more likely to be raised with the amount of attention all children require in order to develop in a manner that is emotionally stable. There is nothing “hard wired” into our brain at such a young age that requires us to have a mother and a father. All that is required for us is a caretaker, or if you will “A mothers attention” But not necessarily a mother. Such attention can in fact be given by any emotional man which in fact gay men often prove to be very expressive. Their lesbian counterparts should prove to be equally capable on the ground alone of them being women, which most people believe to be the maternal sex, however I could go on to prove that either men and women can be equally attentive to child care which I wont do until another book.

If you go deep enough into biology and neurology, it can be argued that the various biological processes during pregnancy create an emotional bond that is essential to early childhood development, these factors are already irrelevant to conventional adopting mothers. They are also factors that are not “set in stone” due to our evolutionary biology, as children were often raised by the entire family group, tribe or village which often includes a community of maternal females

Furthermore in the development of gender identity: This can be measured in the instance of a single parent. Some people have declared certain “questions” the child might ask, to be “gateways” to answers that might “scar” the child for life. The notion that a child asks “Why don’t I have a mommy” or “…a daddy” is irrelevant. Just as irrelevant as if a child asks it of a single parent; and for that reason the development will also be as unhindered as far as sexual/gender identity. (at least no more hindered that that of a child raised by a single parent.

Sexual roles and Gender Roles are two different things.

On Sexual roles:

These children are not likely to develop homosexual “tendencies”, solely on the principle that they have gay parents. Sexual attraction is due to processes in our biology that do not exist in a cognitive level and thus not susceptible for reconditioning (Which mind you, is why I find the term “Former homosexual” quite funny) They will select their true sexuality during their sexual development and that is around puberty. At this time, they will be exposed to male and female peers in school, and thus be able to acquire the stimulus required to make such a “decision” or more precisely “Identification”

It has been and could be argued that the stability of an upbringing can be attributed to the presence of both a mother and a father, in regards to gender roles and etc… While I seriously doubt that many fundamentalists can make this argument let alone comprehend the science behind it, I will grant them this advocacy and explain why this is probably not the case, and of course why I say “probably”

Firstly, I say probably because I can support but cannot conclude with high certainty the fact of the matter, and understand the difference between theory and hypothetical. (AKA: im not an “all knowing dick in a box” Like some people say they “know” shit from a source that is apparently “magical” Oh, sorry… miraculous, divine… etc…)

But on the matter of studying the developmental psychology of children raised in a LGBT couple home: is somewhat an “infant” science. There is not enough data on the matter. But preliminary data shows that these children are only subject to radical development in communities that are conservative on the matter, which is the case for a hostile environment.

Children whom are treated hostilely by peers for whatever reason in “bullying” scenarios, will yield the same results on either side of the equation. Thus the idea that children will be treated especially “harmful” by peers for having same sex parents, is unfounded save for any “fundamentalist” that chooses to teach their children to enforce it. As for the studies on LBGT couples, the studies done thus far have shows no ill effects in itself that would be additional to the adoption done by heterosexual couples and the development therein. The children will grow up just fine.

All in all, LGBT marriages and adoption can prove to be not only wonderful, but useful to societies orphans. They are just as likely to be just as loving… if not more so, due to the chance they have. Its kind of a big deal.

Feel free to send me any questions on the matter, but should to decide to show me any kind of “Wrath of god” I will show you the power of logic, and introduce you to something far more godlike. That’s you’re only warning.

Thanks for reading.


From → Uncategorized

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: