Well, it seems to me, Vicki that there can hardly be comparisons between the examples you suggest.
In the case of the minor, there are sound reasons for the restriction as they are judged not to be emotionally, physically and mentally mature enough to cope with marriage. They are children, not adults.
In the case of the sibling, parent etc there are considered to be undesirable genetic reasons why marriage is not a good idea.
And in the case of someone who is already married - I assume you're talking about societies which consider themselves to be based on monogamy. In which case there would seem to be sound reasons why marrying several people at once would be a bad thing.
I don't see any connection whatsoever with any of the above to the situation of men/women who want to embark on a same-sex marriage.
They are adults and can therefore, presumably, be trusted to speak for and decide for themselves. There are no genetic barriers to them being in love, having a sexual relationship or marrying. And the relationship would be a monogamous one, therefore falling just as ably into the current legal framework of our society as a hetrosexual marriage.
If opponents of same-sex marriage could provide honest and valid answers to your questions above, and to any other questions you might have regarding the affects of same-sex marriage on society as a whole and children in particular, would you rethink your acceptance of same-sex marriage?
Would these honest and valid answers be fact? Or simply opinion? Even biased opinion? It seems to me that they could hardly be anything but the latter. Even the question has bias as it seems to imply that the only effects a same-sex marriage could possibly have on society or children would be wholly negative. And by further implication that any 'evidence' which suggests there might be positive effects would
not be honest and valid. So as evidence, it would seem to me to be greatly flawed at the outset, even before it was presented.
And if you're suggesting that 'evidence' could be presented by those opposed to same-sex marriage of examples where such marriage has harmed society as a whole or children, then my response would have to be "And...?"
Those who aren't opposed could equally provide examples of dozens, hundreds, thousands of cases where the same was true of hetrosexual marriage.
This week, the UK has been in an orgy of hand-wringing and self-examination after the death of Baby P, who was sadistically tortured by his mother, stepfather and their male lodger. Would you - could you with any degree of logic - suggest that he would have been any more at risk had his parents been homosexual?
Homosexuals are individuals. As such their experiences of marriage and of raising children will cover the full range from good to bad and all things in between, just like their hetrosexual counterparts.
So I can't see that this evidence you suggest might be out there would prove anything either way.
LabRat
