.
The argument often used against Same Sex Marriage is that it should not
be called “marriage” but rather a “civil union” – call it ANYTHING you
want, just don’t call it marriage!
But advocates for Same Sex Marriage simply refuse to rename it, despite
such “civil unions” not really differing from marriage in anything but
name.
Have you ever asked yourself “why”?
A quick perusing of the following quotes ought to give a hint to the answer:
“Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of
the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so. … Being
queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family, and in
the process, transforming the very fabric of society. … As a
lesbian, I am fundamentally different from non-lesbian women. …In
arguing for the right to legal marriage, lesbians and gay men would be
forced to claim that we are just like heterosexual couples, have the
same goals and purposes, and vow to structure our lives similarly. … We
must keep our eyes on the goals of providing true alternatives to
marriage and of radically reordering society's view of reality.”
-- Paula Ettelbrick, “Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?”, in
William Rubenstein, ed., Lesbians, Gay Men and the Law (New York: The
New Press, 1993), pp. 401-405.
"A middle ground might be to fight for same sex marriage and its benefits, and then, once
granted, redefine the institution completely, to demand the right to
marry not as a way of adhering to society's moral codes but rather to
debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution." -- Michelangelo Signorile, "Bridal Wave," OUT Magazine, December/January 1994, p.161
"It [gay marriage] is also a chance to wholly transform the definition of family in American culture.
It is the final tool with which to dismantle all sodomy statutes, get
education about homosexuality and AIDS into public schools, and, in
short, usher in a sea of change in how society views and treats us." -- Michelangelo Signorile, "I do, I do, I do, I do, I do," OUT Magazine, May 1996, p.30
"[E]nlarging the concept to embrace same-sex couples would necessarily transform it into something new....Extending
the right to marry to gay people -- that is, abolishing the traditional
gender requirements of marriage -- can be one of the means, perhaps the
principal one, through which the institution divests itself of the
sexist trappings of the past." -- Tom Stoddard, quoted in Roberta
Achtenberg, et al, "Approaching 2000: Meeting the Challenges to San
Francisco's Families," The Final Report of the Mayor's Task Force on
Family Policy, City and County of San Francisco, June 13, 1990, p.1.
 |
| Click Pic for "Peer Reviewed Research: The Holy Grail of Truth?" |
There is an element in the Gay Community that fully intends to
transform the current parameters of marriage and create something
completely new.
This is classical Cultural Marxism and is the reason why Gay Rights
Activists and feminists have joined each other at the urinal of eternal
victimization, despite the
obvious contradiction of each group’s
fundamental
premise – that being feminists' entire raison d'être is based upon
“Gender is a Social Construct,” (therefore women are discriminated
against because they are treated differently while being born fundamentally the same), whereas Gay Rights Activists argue
that they are
born gay (refuting gender is a social construct) and therefore they are victimized because they are
born
that way. These
arguments are mutually contradictory at the most fundamental level, and
the two groups ought to be enemies… and yet, they obviously aren’t. The
reason is that the radical wings of both factions have the same
fundamental goal: they both wish to alter the family unit
into something completely new.
(
Read More Here)
The argument often used against Same Sex Marriage is that it should not
be called “marriage” but rather a “civil union” – call it ANYTHING you
want, just don’t call it marriage!
