You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Yes, It's Their Human Right (Gay Marrage) [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
n2doc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 09:35 PM
Original message
Yes, It's Their Human Right (Gay Marrage)
Advertisements [?]
Wa Po has a good discussion section on this issue. Here is one of the posted opinion pieces:

Yes, It's Their Human Right
Bill Emmott

London, England - This question is upside down, in both moral and logical terms. Instead it ought to read: "Why shouldn't homosexuals be allowed to marry?".

The burden of proof, in other words, should be carried by those who oppose legal and moral equality for homosexuals, not those who favor it. Marriage is a pledge of commitment, of a long-term bond, between two people to stay together, to look after each other, to be faithful to one another, to share costs, incomes and assets. To decide to marry is to decide to make an extra, stronger commitment beyond simply stating one's love, or simply living together. I can see no reason why this should be denied to one category of human beings on grounds of their sexual preferences.

Some respond by saying that marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman. But this is like saying that nothing should ever be changed from its initial state. That old definition is wrong. So it should be changed. Others argue that marriage is there to protect children. Nonsense: that may be a nice side-effect of the institution, but it is not its essential purpose. My wife and I have no children. Does that mean we are not entitled to be married? Of course not.

It is a simple question of equal human rights. If you want to complicate it, then add an argument of social order and practicality: the more committed couples we have in our societies the better. It makes no sense to deny that extra pledge of commitment to people who want to make it. And "civil unions" or other quasi-marital partnerships are not enough. The right outcome is full legal equality.

Bill Emmott is the former editor of The Economist magazine, a leading international current affairs publication from England. He is now an independent writer, speaker, and consultant on international affairs.

more:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC