Please give the following comment to your friend hallyluia:
One of the main reasons for marriage is to raise a family.
Oh, I didn't know that was a legally regulated requisite for marriage rights. Nevermind, then!
...with the intent not to offer that child both a mother and a father.
You're right! Raising a child without both a mother and father must be regulated by the government as well in order to remain consistent with this reasoning. That is why it is illegal for a single parent to raise a child.
Sure, we do. All Professional Sports could be considered "discriminatory institutions".
Comparing the discrimination of one’s physical and mental capabilities with one’s undeniable birth-trait (e.g. race, gender, or hair color) is a pretty ridiculous route to take.
Although it is true that not everyone qualifies for the same job or, as you have grossly illustrated, the same sports team, that isn’t the same as someone specifically denying someone that opportunity based on something they were born with. Whether this happens or not in our society (which I can agree that it does), it isn’t endorsed by the government; marriage, on the other hand, is.
Our government is one which requires equal rights and opportunities for all, despite such things as race, gender and hair color. It's institutions cannot be blatantly discriminatory.
See how absurd the argument becomes when you don't look at the whole picture.As I’ve already pointed out, by looking at the bigger picture of this argument, we see that marriage
( ... )
Comments 3
Reply
One of the main reasons for marriage is to raise a family.
Oh, I didn't know that was a legally regulated requisite for marriage rights. Nevermind, then!
...with the intent not to offer that child both a mother and a father.
You're right! Raising a child without both a mother and father must be regulated by the government as well in order to remain consistent with this reasoning. That is why it is illegal for a single parent to raise a child.
Reply
Sure, we do. All Professional Sports could be considered "discriminatory institutions".
Comparing the discrimination of one’s physical and mental capabilities with one’s undeniable birth-trait (e.g. race, gender, or hair color) is a pretty ridiculous route to take.
Although it is true that not everyone qualifies for the same job or, as you have grossly illustrated, the same sports team, that isn’t the same as someone specifically denying someone that opportunity based on something they were born with.
Whether this happens or not in our society (which I can agree that it does), it isn’t endorsed by the government; marriage, on the other hand, is.
Our government is one which requires equal rights and opportunities for all, despite such things as race, gender and hair color. It's institutions cannot be blatantly discriminatory.
See how absurd the argument becomes when you don't look at the whole picture.As I’ve already pointed out, by looking at the bigger picture of this argument, we see that marriage ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment