I normally wouldn't give Santorum the time of day. But he was on CSPAN for a while today and I had no choice but to hear some of it. And while his position is not surprising, I wanted to talk about his logic. When asked about his opposition to gay marriage, he talked about how its best to raise kids in a traditional male/female household. So because its probably favorable to raise a kid in a heterosexual household, Santorum wants to deny marriage to gay people.
The topic of what type of household environment is best for children is a separate issue from gay marriage. I've talked about this before but I wanted to drive home the point again. Marriage is simply a social contract between two adults. And aside from the declaration the contract entails, there are some fairly minor legal implications that go along with it. That's all marriage is. It has nothing to do with having and raising kids. You don't have to get married in order to have kids. Nor do you have to have kids if you get married.
So Santorum's point is meaningless. It only belongs in the debate about whether gay people should be allowed to adopt kids. And as far as I know, they on a pretty extensive basis. And I'm sure there are at least a few studies out there that show its not a problem for the child having homosexual parents. In fact, I would guess that even if that isn't ideal, its better than having kids in foster homes. I don't think there is a good argument against gay marriage. But if Santorum is going to be against it he needs to come up with a reason that actually has something to do with the issue.
The topic of what type of household environment is best for children is a separate issue from gay marriage. I've talked about this before but I wanted to drive home the point again. Marriage is simply a social contract between two adults. And aside from the declaration the contract entails, there are some fairly minor legal implications that go along with it. That's all marriage is. It has nothing to do with having and raising kids. You don't have to get married in order to have kids. Nor do you have to have kids if you get married.
So Santorum's point is meaningless. It only belongs in the debate about whether gay people should be allowed to adopt kids. And as far as I know, they on a pretty extensive basis. And I'm sure there are at least a few studies out there that show its not a problem for the child having homosexual parents. In fact, I would guess that even if that isn't ideal, its better than having kids in foster homes. I don't think there is a good argument against gay marriage. But if Santorum is going to be against it he needs to come up with a reason that actually has something to do with the issue.
Comments
Post a Comment