Gay 'marriage' rally says "Love is Love" - but what if it destroys other loves?
 |
| Same Sex Marriage (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
· A new Australian Galaxy poll shows a big relative majority of Australians think it is more important for a child to have the love of both mother and father, than for two men to have the right to marry and create a family.
As hundreds held placards saying “love is love” at the rally for 'marriage equality' in various capital cities in Australia, a visiting family doctor condemned what he calls the “blind narcissism” of gay activists.
“Gay 'marriage' would affirm one love”, said Dr David van Gend, President of the Australia Marriage Forum, “but it would destroy other, more primal loves.
“I'll tell you what love is. It is the tenderness between a mother and her baby – but gay 'marriage' tears mother and baby apart.
“If you give two men the right to marry, you give them the right to create motherless children. You deliberately abolish a mother from the lives of future children created within the 'marriage' of two men. "That is not an act of love" Dr van Gend said.
Laws that violate the most primal love
"If you pass a law for same-sex 'marriage', you overturn all state prohibitions on same-sex adoption and surrogacy - it is the final violation of a child's right to have, wherever possible, both a mum and a dad. What's there to celebrate in a law that forces a child to miss out on either her mum or her dad - which is what a law for same-sex marriage will do?" Dr van Gend asked.
“Shame on those narcissistic men who would knowingly deprive a baby of her mother, just to meet their own emotional needs,” Dr van Gend said.
“And all credit to the homosexual men who stand up and speak against gay marriage, exactly because it is wrong for children. Like the gay fashion designers Dolce and Gabbana who said in March, “The family is not a fad. I am opposed to the idea of a child growing up with two gay parents”.
“Any proposed law for gay 'marriage' would serve adult self-interest while violating the most primal and sacred bond there is, the bond between a mother and her baby. We are just repeating the harm we caused kids with terrible policies in the past - like laws for forced adoption", Dr van Gend said.
"Of couse some children already miss out on a mother or a father - perhaps through separation, or even the death of a parent - but that is a tragedy you would never wish on a child. Laws for same-sex 'marriage' deliberately impose that loss on future children, in a premeditated way. That is the injustice and offence of same-sex 'marriage'", Dr van Gend said.
"If you pass a law for same-sex 'marriage', you overturn all state prohibitions on same-sex adoption and surrogacy - it is the final violation of a child's right to have, wherever possible, both a mum and a dad. What's there to celebrate in a law that forces a child to miss out on either her mum or her dad - which is what a law for same-sex marriage will do?" Dr van Gend asked.
“Shame on those narcissistic men who would knowingly deprive a baby of her mother, just to meet their own emotional needs,” Dr van Gend said.
“And all credit to the homosexual men who stand up and speak against gay marriage, exactly because it is wrong for children. Like the gay fashion designers Dolce and Gabbana who said in March, “The family is not a fad. I am opposed to the idea of a child growing up with two gay parents”.
“Any proposed law for gay 'marriage' would serve adult self-interest while violating the most primal and sacred bond there is, the bond between a mother and her baby. We are just repeating the harm we caused kids with terrible policies in the past - like laws for forced adoption", Dr van Gend said.
"Of couse some children already miss out on a mother or a father - perhaps through separation, or even the death of a parent - but that is a tragedy you would never wish on a child. Laws for same-sex 'marriage' deliberately impose that loss on future children, in a premeditated way. That is the injustice and offence of same-sex 'marriage'", Dr van Gend said.
Gay activists force us to choose between loves
“So two men who wave placards saying 'love is love' are really saying, 'Our love is more important than the love between mother and baby'. I disagree, and so do most Australians - according to our new research”, Dr van Gend said.
"Our society is having to choose between loves. Our federal lawmakers have to choose: they cannot vote for gay 'marriage' without voting to separate future children from their mothers.
"All I say is that gay couples already have freedom to love whom they will, and there is no discrimination against their relationship under Australian law. Let them continue with that freedom and that love - but don't let them force children to miss out another, even deeper love", Dr van Gend concluded.
Related articles
“So two men who wave placards saying 'love is love' are really saying, 'Our love is more important than the love between mother and baby'. I disagree, and so do most Australians - according to our new research”, Dr van Gend said.
"Our society is having to choose between loves. Our federal lawmakers have to choose: they cannot vote for gay 'marriage' without voting to separate future children from their mothers.
"All I say is that gay couples already have freedom to love whom they will, and there is no discrimination against their relationship under Australian law. Let them continue with that freedom and that love - but don't let them force children to miss out another, even deeper love", Dr van Gend concluded.
Related articles
