Divorce Attorneys

In a final column of my friend William Martin’10 wrote that “the liberalization process of cultural diversity are progressing too slowly, for many gay couples being Petition for access to marriage” ( “Keep your horses,” the 20 March). Indeed, if this process is taking root at all, it is time - and rightly so.

Two trains Anglo-Saxon, deeply rooted in American culture, it is inevitably disrupt the ambitions of gay marriage is favorable: first, a tradition of resistance against tyranny and cultural Secondly, respect for marriage, an institution The most elementary human social organization.

Marriage logically and chronologically, preceded by government and their laws. A real marriage does not require the approval of the man and woman, including the entrance - a civilian judge or as a member of the clergy is superfluous, even though it is often in ceremonies of law.

Marriage is, in many respects, a purely religious institution, which, for those who accept, the creator, in many cases, the involvement of atheists, in order to cover the positive benefits marriage. In the Christian tradition, under the law and many areas of law, a simple confirmation of a man and a married woman, that is all that is necessary for a place of marriage. The government has no theoretical role in the marriage, as always.

Government in the context of marriage, if it is to be one, is their ability to promote and facilitate existing shares institution of marriage - after all, the government has a legitimate interest in strengthening cultural ties, people already one game zero.

Martin is a man of straw, the argument for the assertion that human beings, the law against homosexual marriage are simply bigoted, biblical literalists. The complaint of bigotry is the same for those who mischaracterize and stereotype of the opposition, as well as the evaluation of the arguments terms accessible to the public, is a constructive approach.

Most conservatives, the government restricts and culturally-conservative Libertären against the legalization of homosexual marriage is not the money reasons, but also because they see it as a form of cultural tyranny worrisome, where the government has manipulated Artificially customs of the population, which gathers around him.

Some critics also have moral objections and bestiality perceived maturity of homosexuality, but they understand that people in the changes in attitude responds to the need for greater power and their communities, social ostracization . The main reason for rejecting homosexual marriage is the fundamental principle that man and history, and not the governments that define culture.

The argument that I would propose is that governments at all levels in this country and others must either grow, promote and facilitate the smooth marriage, or to withdraw from the institution as a whole. A piece of paper can not be validated by a marriage, but only the legal recognition accorded to a wedding, there is, regardless of the law.

Suppose that homosexual marriage is also possible conceptually homosexual Americans ask why a piece of paper? The marriage is really his goal? What seems more likely is that they are eager social sanction for their way of life, and attempt by demanding Indeed, the fact that legislators, judges and leaders impose acceptance in society.

The gay community, you can most of the benefits that the average heterosexual married couples enjoy under the auspices of a treaty. For example, upon the death of Tom’s, Harry’s Tom can inherit property, in accordance with a written contract or the preference expressed by Tom, as confirmed by witnesses.

Of course, there are other benefits that accompany heterosexual marriage (hospital visitation rights, for example). But it is in the best of cases, a reason to get rid of the policy arbitrary limit for certain benefits that legally married couples. The assertion that “equity” and “equality” are the real targets of legal security, gay marriage, the fact deny the existence of such a regulation is not necessary to achieve them.

I have faith that if the Americans in each country, or in the country as a whole, were able to confirm their culture (perhaps by vote), homosexual marriage would be destroyed. This could explain why the gay lobby noisily against a vote on gay marriage in Massachusetts. They know they are losing, and cautiously - tyrannical - seek top-down, government intervention to force the company to accept its ideology, and culture.

Most human beings, despite the claims of some, as this understanding for a long time up by society organizations and government, and the physical, which, unlike the gay lifestyle. But Martin is well taken: left winger, more cautiously, to enable Americans to discern what she and her friends in the Democratic Party, truly believe.