Archive Sections: letters | music | index | features | photos | arts/lit | satire Find Iranian singles today!

Gays

Say no to same-sex marriage
No matter what the case, marriage has been and always will remain a religious sanction

March 15, 2005
iranian.com

Cia Davoodi is a young teenager living in Toronto. He was born in Iran and raised in the U.S. & Canada. This is an email he sent to his father in Iran yesterday:

Salam Baba,

This month, my friend (Jordan Cross) and I decided that we will challenge two other students in our school on whether same-sex marriage is right or wrong. As you know the marriage between two males is now being legalized in Canada, so I decided I should pitch in my two cents. To my surprise, this article was not accepted by the newspaper and we are in the proccess of writing a new one so that we are not "hateful" and are not "discriminating". I hope that this finds its way to Iranian.com so that the Iranian community can see what the true meaning of freedom of speech is:

Many people, friends and strangers, ask us why we are so completely against same-sex marriage. For us, simply pushing moral values, religion and common sense aside to think about the subject as a civil union between two persons does not justify the act. Marriage was created thousands of years ago. It was created as a religious coming together of a man and a woman to spend the rest of their lives together and create a family. Why, after thousands of years, would we change the definition of marriage to suit the needs of a minority?

Genesis 2:18: The Lord Said "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him." It is forbidden in most of the major religions of our world for two persons of the same sex to marry. In the book of Genesis, which is valid to over 3.3 billion (55% of the world's population) people in the world, it is said that god created woman to be mans helper in life because no animal could be a suitable companion.

Something which strikes me about the topic is the number of people that believe the fact that a person is either born homosexual or heterosexual. Sexual orientation is clearly in a person's hands and can be changed at different points in life. How else can one explain bi-sexual persons, or people who are homosexuals and completely change their preference and turn into heterosexuals without one bit of pressure put on them? Are we that closed-minded that we try to use the fact that a person is born gay to justify the act of marriage between two homosexuals? Do we look at homosexuality as a disease and use the fact that "they are born homosexuals" as an excuse to make it seem like it is not a choice? Are we not truthful enough to ourselves to accept the fact that being a homosexual is a choice and that we don't need to justify it by saying we are born with it?

A potential problem with legalizing same-sex marriage stems from the legal precedent that will be set. By legalizing gay marriage, we are essentially saying that any minority that comes crying to parliament claiming discrimination will have same-sex marriage as support for their "cause". Imagine what the civilized world would think if we had polygamous and incestuous couples being married in Canada. Some will say that these are ridiculous claims, and that Canada will never legalize such things. But why not? How are two brothers any different than a gay couple? Why should a man who wants five wives be discriminated against? Those who truly support same-sex marriage must also support its ugly counterparts; because that's the course we've set for ourselves by legalizing same-sex marriages.

It is also a fact that gay couples can share the same rights as normal Canadian citizens without being married. Civil unions are being practiced today, even as this article is being written. It is perfectly legal for a gay couple to go to city hall and get a civil union. This form of union does not require a change in the definition of marriage because it is not considered marriage. This form of union also keeps the door closed to the unpleasant forms of partnerships mentioned above because there is no precedent that they can use against the courts when making their case. It's safe, simple and equal. By changing the definition of marriage, we are effectively singling out gays and giving a legal precedent for the other forms of marriage to argue on.

After legalizing same-sex marriage, we will be completely removing the meaning from the word "family". Marriage, from the dawn of time, whether one believes in religion or simply denies god, has been a religious coming together of a man and a woman. No matter what the case, marriage has been and always will remain a religious sanction.

Unfortunately, in countries such as ours, people invite change no matter what it may be and what implications it may have for their society. Not only will this negatively affect our children, but gay marriage will have to be taught in schools as morally equal to heterosexual marriage, thus taking the meaning out of the word morals, and that's not something that we, or the rest of Canada should be willing to do so that gay couples can have more rights than normal Canadian citizens.

* *

COMMENT
For letters section
To Cid Davoodi

* FAQ
* Advertising
* Support iranian.com
* Editorial policy
* Write for Iranian.com
* Reproduction

ALSO
Cid Davoodi
Features

RELATED
Opinion

Diaspora

Rights

Book of the day
mage.com

Black Parrot, Green Crow
A Collection of Short Fiction
Houshang Golshiri
Edited by Heshmat Moayyad

Copyright 1995-2013, Iranian LLC.   |    User Agreement and Privacy Policy   |    Rights and Permissions