@icegene:
把同性恋和乱伦相提并论，are you serious??!! You are So ignorant!!
为什么两个相爱（没有血源关系）的人要有一个受法律保护的家庭关系就这么难以理解吗？
同性恋者并不代表他们是不讲道德的人群，异性恋者也未必都是正人君子。同性恋要结婚反而说明人家重视家庭和法律。
一看就知道你在国内长大的，容不得和你不一样的人或事。多数并不代表正确，很多事情是没有对和错的。每个人都有权以自己喜欢的方式生活，只要不伤害到别人。
人家合法化了，难道你也要成为同性恋？！肯定不能！所以说人家合法结婚不关你什么事，别杞人忧天了。
Tax benefits, legal adoption, welfare transfers, and more refined and accessible legal contracts should be used to meet these needs, not the institution of marriage itself.
nurhaci 发表评论于 2013-06-28 03:05:47
Same-sex marriage changes the purpose of law. It no longer will serve, in cooperation with other parts of society, to channel behavior and socialization to achieve this synthesis of goods. It will function to extend marriage privileges to a particular group of sexual friendships while excluding many other interdependent care givers. Rather than extending the marital status and privilege to same-sex couples and then gradually to other kinds of caring relationships (which logic will dictate), we should find alternative ways of meeting the dependency needs of same-sex couples, interdependent friends, and dependent but unmarried kin. Tax benefits, legal adoption, welfare transfers, and more refined and accessible legal contracts should be used to meet these needs, not the institution of marriage itself.
nurhaci 发表评论于 2013-06-28 03:04:39
The legalization of same-sex marriage may give public codification to modernity's march toward breaking apart these goods sex from love, sex from procreation, and parenting from procreation. It finally changes the logic of marriage. Same-sex marriage does not simply extend an old institution to a new group of people. It changes the definition of marriage. It reduces marriage
primarily to a committed affectionate sexual relation. It goes further. It gives this new and more narrow view of marriage all of the cultural, legal, and public supports that accrued to the institution when it functioned to hold together this complex set of goods. Should liberalism give up its interest in complex organizations of the good in the name of a flat justice which actually promotes new injustices? Same-sex marriage changes the purpose of law.
nurhaci 发表评论于 2013-06-28 03:03:40
Bringing biological parents into the reinforcements of sex, mutual help, and affection enhanced their responsibility and satisfied the observed hunger of children to be raised by those who give them life. These were the classic goods of marriage. Integrating and channeling these fragile values was a task for law, religion, and the socializing institutions of society. The religious language of sacrament and covenant added sacred weight that both valued and integrated these four human goods, but they could be identified independently of the religious symbols that gave them depth. It is a highly dubious charge that keeping these goods together is an act of religious discrimination and prejudice.
nurhaci 发表评论于 2013-06-28 03:02:41
This raises the question, is it rational to develop social policies without better knowledge?
There are strong arguments that the present discussion is based on inadequate historical knowledge. Marriage is frequently characterized as based on past religious prejudices. It is true: Judaism and Christianity have carried much of our Western understanding of marriage. It is also true, however, that these marriage traditions have absorbed parts of the secular marital codes of Greek law, Aristotelian philosophy, Roman law, and German law. Ancient secular systems saw legal marriage as accomplishing a complex alignment between sexual activity,
procreation, mutual help and affection, and parental care and accountability. Bringing biological parents into the reinforcements of sex, mutual help, and affection enhanced their responsibility and satisfied the observed hunger of children to be raised by those who give them life.
nurhaci 发表评论于 2013-06-28 03:01:10
Rather than extending marriage to cover all dependent relations, shouldn't we find other ways to support people who need help?
Others ask whether same-sex marriage may be unjust to children. Doesn't it raise to the level of normative social policy the idea that children don't need the parents who gave them life? Others observe that we do not know the effects on children of being raised by same-sex parents. Recent reviews by Steven Nock and Robert Lerner of existing social-science studies of gay parenting demonstrate that all are inadequate with regard to testable hypotheses, sample, controls, and hence conclusions. In short, we have no knowledge about these effects even
though recent court opinions assume we do. This raises the question, is it rational to develop social policies without better knowledge?
nurhaci 发表评论于 2013-06-28 02:59:55
The Liberal Case Against Same-Sex Marriage
Don S. Browning-Contributor
Political and religious liberals pride themselves in valuing justice,
rationality, knowledge, and hypothetical thinking. With these values in
mind, the rush to legalize same-sex marriages may have problems.
Take justice. Some legal theorists wonder if giving marriage benefits to same-sex couples does injustice to other human arrangements where people care for one another brother caring for ailing brother, a younger daughter caring for her aging mother, two older women pooling resources without having sex. Why privilege partners in sexual relationships and not those actually dependent on one another? Rather than extending marriage to cover all dependent
relations, shouldn't we find other ways to support people who need help?
To abc, 在正常人5根指头的情况下，有人出现6根手指头，或者出现手蹼脚蹼这些小概率非正常的个体，是很正常的自然现象啊。我们教育孩子是不要歧视与我们不一样的人就足够了，但是必须要孩子认识正常的手是什么样子吧，难道教孩子认手的图片还得拿一张5指头的告诉小朋友这是正常的手，然后再拿一张六指的，说这也是正常的手吗？
正常就是正常，不正常的地方就是不正常，这是从生物学角度上的正常非正常，而非褒义贬义。如果非按你的逻辑来，那以后，新生儿无论多根少根手指头，身体上，智智力上有任何缺陷，医生都要恭喜父母孩子一切正常了？
