Nature tells it all. In our earth past environments, most species evolve into 2 sexes. It means that the nature has decided the normal way to continue the human being as a species.
Marriage is reserved for the male-female relationship which is required to provide born efforts of bearing and raising children. In general, the natural parenthoods provide the best values, resulting from past evolution, advancing human species.
One-sex relationship, however, is not the norm to continue the human species and cannot be awarded the marriage. It has nothing to do with the discrimination against gay couples in the society or related to any religious belief. Though the non-natural parenthoods can provide good cares of the children, it cannot replace the normal way designed in the long duration of human revolution.
Like close relative marriage, same-sex marriage is not natural.
JrrCool
************************
Freedom of Chioce
Opinion from Peter S.:
I know your point. And I had the same opinion with you. But now I am not so sure.
I think the key issue here is not same-sex-marriage, but the freedom of choice. Do you believe people have the freedom of choice, even though the choice may not be agreeable to our tradition, education, or the main thought of most people at a point of time? Even the choice is not right! We have a lot of debates of this kind in human history. Life is an adventurous, trial-and-error process. We should thank the brave people to try new things, with great sacrifice or great reward to themselves sometimes, to enlarge our body of knowledge. That's why freedom-of -choice is important in making progress, and there is always a cost to it. No free lunch, as someone says. Sometimes, freedom can mean inconvenience, even chaos to ordinary people.
Other than freedom-of -choice, there is another bigger issue. Who has the ultimate authority to say yes or no? God may be the answer. But how do we know the opinion of God-- the Law of Nature? by the Bible? the church? or by experiments -- trial-and-error? Experiments may not only be the only way of making progress in science, but in all human endeavors. That's why freedom is so important. Again, there is a cost to it. And we have to put up with the turbulence come with it.
By the way, there may be more happy couples in the same-sex-marriage than the different-sex-marriage. Is there any survey on this subject? That would be interesting.
Hopefully, we can have a conclusion after the experiment. And then, the whole society can be advanced to a higher stage.
In short, I am not against it, even though I will not do it. Same as gambling. And I believe that most TV programs are much more harmful than same-sex-marriage to human beings.
God bless us.
********************
Reply from JrrCool:
Dear Peter,
Thank you for precious opinion. You said it so detailed that all your points are well understood.
Ironically, I used to think your way that freedom of choice is number one priority. But now I think there isn’t any freedom of choice if the choice affects the present or future social structure.
If the marriage is giving up the key element of reproduction for advancing human species, the social structure will be changed. If the marriage is only based on love, pleasure or convenience etc., then anybody can marry anyone else as long as they do not reproduce so there won’t have any genetic defeat problems.
Of course no one knows the good or bad of any new adventure. People should judge, based upon their wisdom and past experiences, whether a risky step should be taken. Like the case in communism, many people thought it was a good idea. Now it is considered a bad idea in the past century. However, who knows? May be 200 years from now, people will think it is a good idea again.
About happiness, realistically, people don’t need to get married to be happy. Also gay couples do not need to get married to be happy too. So this is a different issue.
TV programs can be another example of misuse of freedom of choice. It’s the producer’s choice that he thinks it is good idea for general public.
Above is just my opinion that you may not agree. It’s good to have a nice discussion with you.
************************
Asian Democratic System
Opinion from H. B.:
Hi!
It's a very interesting topic and also controversial one which touches the nerve of all.
To me, personally, I am totally agreed with you. But not all people are "me". In Asia, our political systems are generally pro-family and the society (priority in our legislation is family/society based), thus our perception of VALUE is very different from the West; mainly in that we are not practising an absolute Democratic System to that of the West.
Therefore, I am not surprise that there is a view of Freedom of Choice which cannot be totally denied under the rule of absolute democratic system, every individual opinion counts as they each have their own "Rights".
This is the problem of practising Absolute Democratic System, no one could discounted the view of other individual. You can debate on it until all faces are flushed, the question is still remained open (not like the case of majority wil prevail) like chicken n eggs.
When you talk about species, I assume you refer to Homo sapiens and not all living things, which are very complicated; displaying different form of reproduction patterns to suit it's own propogation/prolification purposes.
Anyway, I am very happy and comfortable with our environment here that adopts "hetero" (or different sexes) -marriage as a norm. Above is merely some of my gripe to exchange and I do not wish to engage in this futile discussion.
Cheers,
