Representative Barney Frank speaks out...

Gay Senator Denounces Gay Marriage Ban

He has a good point, how is it that anyone is "harmed" by gay-marriage.

certainly, some people might feel some religious/moral objection or offense, but that doesn't rise to the level of "harm" that threatens their personal lives.

However, a constitutional ban on gay marriage does threaten the personal lives of homosexuals. It de-legitimizes (or worse, re-criminalizes) their relationships and prohibits them from equal protection under the constitution.

Interestingly, Senator Cornyn opined,

"If the national culture teaches that marriage is just about adult love and not about the raising of children, then we should be troubled but not surprised by the results,"

My question: how is it that a gay-marriage ban promotes the idea of marriage as an institution for raising children?

First of all, I personally know plenty of gay couples that are raising children. This is a stupid distinction to make.

Wouldn't it make more sense for the parents of these children to have parents who are "married" and who can take responsibility and make judgments about their children's welfare as heterosexual married couples are allowed to?

As it stands right now, if a lesbian couple goes to the "bank" and makes a withdrawal, nine months later the child has two mommies. Nothing is going to change that.

What is ridiculous is the legal hoops-o-fire that the non-biological mother has to jump through to have the right to admit the child to the hospital, to include the child on her health care policy, to pick the kid up from school, or any of the other parental functions that she is de facto assuming.

Allowing gay marriage would permit recognition of relationships in which two people of the same sex are trying to raise a family.

No one is going to stop gay couples from enjoying their lives together, and gay couples naturally going to raise families just like everyone else.

A constitutional ban will not stop that.

It does more damage to our society's fabric to deny some children the right to have two legally recognized parents just because those children's parents happen to be gay.

imagine, a kid gets hit by a car and the only parent around is the non-biological parent (because, for instance, the biological parent is out of town). when he takes the kid to the hospital, without the benefit of a legally recognized marriage, he has absolutely no rights in which to make the life or death decisions that parents must sometimes make in those situations.

there are so many more examples, I could go on for ages.

if we look at the gay marriage issue from the perspective of what is best for the children (recognizing that gays have kids just like everyone else), the answer is abundantly clear: gay marriage is better than no gay marriage.

so the religious folks should stick to preaching their homophobia at church and leave it out of the constitution.