Paradise Under Your Feet — Page 191
Appendix 5: Talking About Homosexuality 191 history, governments did not start defining marriages, governments only described and regulated a special relationship, male and females, being who they are, and the natural chemistry between them leading to the procreative act. Thus, marriage – the joining of male with female to create a household - predates government and organized religion. Religious and secular philosophies only recognized this special relation and strived to further strengthen it, adding sanctity to it and concepts of fidelity. Why is the State particularly interested in the intimate relationship of men with women? It is obvious: the propagation of its people and the welfare of children. The societal ideal has always been the two halves of humanity (male and female) joining to create children, who will have both a father and mother, with their unique and complementary gender roles in raising them. Therein is the heart of the issue. Should society set an ideal enshrined in law recognizing that each gender of the parental enterprise brings unique gifts to the table, or are the genders meaningless? We propose it does matter and there is sociological data to back up the ideal that every child should be raised by their mom and dad. So that is why marriage exists and why society has an interest in preserving it, both for religious and secular reasons. Since the propagation of its people through marriage is a key State interest, that is why for instance, a State may favor married heterosexual couples over non-married couples in its taxation policies, or in other ways. To thus bring same-sex pairing to the same pedestal as heterosexual marriage, by force of law, perpetuates the unfounded notion that there is no difference between same-sex and heterosexual couples and actually devalues the real essence of marriage. Only heterosexual unions bring forth children raised by their biologic birth parents, a universally held, common sense ideal.