Quote:
Originally Posted by Schroeder
I think you are leaving out too much here.
The whole thing is also about the bonuses that married couples get (tax cuts etc.). They get them to make it easier for them to raise children. Why should a homosexual couple (or a childless hetero couple regardless of marriage) get those benefits?
However I think that homosexuals should be able to marry as this also regulates many more things like the right to inhere things from a deceased partner, or the right to get financial support from a partner. Just those family raising benefits should not be granted (but they shouldn't be granted to childless couples either).
|
First, some sanity appears to have found the way back into here.
In regards to your post, the problem in this is that
a) all those benefits have not resulted in any success in regards to child numbers and
b) that married couples without any will to have children are getting the same kind of benefits. And argueable there are far more married couples out there without children then potential homosexual couples. As such that argument does not make sense unless you reduce the benefits to just those that really have children. But as it is already obvious these benefits are not coming with success, this is a mood point anyways. It's a typical example of a"how the perfect world should work" versus "how the world actually works" debate with only focusing on certain points without checking the basics of these points. The mere potential of married heterosexual couples having children does not work, as
potential does not equal reality.
That means, instead of focusing the debate in a constructive manner in how to increase child birth it is becoming a destructive debate in which basic human longings are swept aside for a "greater" goal, even if this goal is based on morally dubious and socially shaky fundamentals. Also, it involves the attitude that the individual in his aspirations and way of life is put under the collective good for everybody. In this human lives and emotions are reduced to maths and numbers, quite similar to what we have seen in the economy in the last decades. It also runs against the ideals of humanism, which is at the core of the Federal Republic of Germany and majorly responsible for the success and respect this country enjoys these days.
My problem with this debate is that it puts people not only under pressure to not work
against society or being punished (live and let live), but actually goes a step further in that they have to work
for society to not get punished. This is easily extendable to other groups and life styles (and already is in regards to the Muslim debate, in which the current tone is not about how to improve the obviously problematic situation of integration, but focused on rants and open hostility towards Muslim groups as a danger to society) and crosses a line that puts society on a course of conflict and may result in violence and oppression when run through all it's logical conclusions. A popular catch phrase could be appropriate here; "the road to hell is plastered with good intentions".