Paddy Manning, a gay Irish blogger, apparently wrote an op-ed piece coming out against same-sex marriage in that country. I can’t seem to find the original article, but I can find it quoted on about 1400 Christian right websites, including the Worldnetdaily. They are rejoicing at a gay writer agreeing with them and gleefully saying “I told you so!” But his arguments are as bad as theirs.
An openly homosexual columnist in Ireland has written a piece blasting his country for considering same-sex marriage, warning the state has no business reinventing the family and undermining children’s “right” to a mother and father.
Paddy Manning, writing in the Irish Daily Mirror, tells of being arrested for hitting on a male police officer, but warns the solution to persecution of homosexuals isn’t to have government carve up traditional marriage.
“Same-sex marriage is not some warm, fluffy equality bunny; it’s a bare-faced state power grab,” Manning writes. “The state gets to entirely remake marriage, not as the man/woman/child model we’ve inherited from 10,000 years of history and across all cultures, but as an anything-goes irrelevant partnership agreement between adults.”
Such a terrible argument, this claim that recognizing gay marriages will “remake” or “redefine” marriage. Absolute nonsense. Not a single marriage in existence will be changed in the slightest, only a small percentage of people will now get their own marriages legally recognized. Straight people aren’t going to stop getting married. They aren’t going to stop having children or loving them. No one is going to suddenly go “Oh wow, I can marry a guy? Why didn’t I think of that? I’ll divorce my wife immediately!” No one is going to decide to become gay if they can get married. The only thing that will happen is that gay people and their children will now have the security of a legally recognized union. That’s it.
Manning explains same-sex unions will render marriage “irrelevant” because “for the first time, children and parenthood [will have] no place in marriage.”
Really? No place in marriage? Seriously?
“Only a man and a woman have children, despite every fantasy the gender-busters want us to believe,” Manning writes. “Every child has a right to that natural life. Same-sex marriage asks us to ignore reality and children’s rights to a mother and father.”
Okay, let’s follow that to its natural conclusion. If every child has a right to a “natural” mother and father in a legally protected relationship, we would forbid all out-of-wedlock pregnancies, or require that any women who gets pregnant must marry the father of the child. We would forbid all surrogate pregnancies, all artificial insemination and all divorce. Welcome to theocracy.
And this argument about protecting children is incredibly hypocritical when it’s used to argue against legal recognition of their parents’ committed relationships. There are millions of children of gay parents all over the world. Legally recognizing the committed relationships of their parents gives them the same protections that the children of straight people already have. Same-sex marriage is good for children, not bad for them.