|Gay Marriage Protest (Washington Post)|
This weekend about 340,000 protesters took to the streets of France to show their objection to the legalisation of gay marriage and the right of these same sex couples to adopt children. It was apparently the biggest demonstration ever staged in France in the last 30 years.
The previous biggest protest in France was the education protest, which was held to express objection to the reform of the private school bill. At that protest, which took place in 1984, approximately 640,000 people participated in the march through the streets of Versailles.
Despite the size of the anti gay marriage and adoption march this weekend, French President François Hollande, who pledged to legalise marriage and adoption for same-sex couples when he ran in last year’s presidential election, seems intent to continue with his plans. On Sunday evening the Justice minister of France specifically stated that the government would continue with its plans without calling a referendum on the matter.
If France does legalise gay marriage it will become the 12th country in the world to do so.
Anyway, that is not the reason for me writing this post. Anyone who knows me, or has read my previous Blog posts, will know that I oppose the concept of gay marriage.
The reason for this post is to mention another piece of legislation that was initially linked to the gay marriage and gay adoption bill, then removed. That legislation would have made Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) available to lesbian couples as well as heterosexual couples in France.
Currently legislation in France only makes Assisted Reproduction Technology available to infertile heterosexual couples who have been married for at least two years, if the women is younger than 43. Gay married couples will therefore not be entitled to this, even if gay marriage is legalised.
It is believed that the changes to this legislation were removed from the bill in order to make the gay marriage and adoption bill more palatable to those who oppose it.
The question that puzzles me is this. Do same sex couples not know that, when they make a choice to spend the rest of their life with another person of the same sex, their choice naturally means that they will be unable to conceive children? This is biology 101! This is not because a bunch of homophobes got together and decided that they wanted to prevent gay couples from conceiving children. It is simply the law of nature.
Nature has specifically designed us humans in such a way that in order to conceive a child, a man and a woman need to copulate. It is also obvious that nature designed it this way because the child needs to be nurtured until he or she is old enough to be self-sufficient. It is also fairly obvious that it is clearly ideal for there to be two people involved in raising the child, although our modern world does make it possible for a single parent to do so quite successfully, although of course it is not the ideal.
It seems to me that some homosexuals are confused and angry about a lot more than just their sexuality. Forget about religious beliefs for a moment. Some homosexuals just seem to me to be on a warpath against nature. It seems to me that they hope, through a combination of legislation and science, to change the natural order of the universe to suit their chosen ideal.
Homosexual couples want to commit sex acts with people of the same sex in ways that the body simply was not designed to.
They want to have their own children by either allowing a stranger’s semen, ova or both, to be inserted inside their bodies or, alternatively, by adopting a child.
They want to live like a natural family, raising a child in an unnatural family scenario, without any thought for the child and the impact their personal and selfish ideals will have on the child or on society as a whole.
I am convinced the world is going mad!