Roger Helmer is wrong on gay marriage but those who shouted him down are too!

God help anyone who dares to oppose any issue that has anything to do with a minority group, and if that person’s politics happens to be right of center then it’s a double whammy. Conservative MEP, Roger Helmer did just that when he said it was wrong for the Coalition government to introduce a bill to allow same-sex marriage. And even though he explained why he feels “gay marriage” is wrong – despite admitting he is a librarian who believes people are free to live and behave as they wish – his remarks angered many including some from his own party!

Of course they were wrong to jump on him and paint him a villain for speaking his mind but at the same time I’m confused as to how he can be a librarian yet not see that gay couples deserve the same rights heterosexual couples now enjoy?

I will bypass his first and second points because one is a linguistic issue and the second is covered in my argument.

Traditionally, marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman, but as we evolve so should our civilizations. It therefore makes sense for marriage to become a relationship between two people who chose to live their lives in a legal and fully recognised union. Also if they and their religious institution are happy for that union to be acknowledged by that body, then that too should be a matter between them.

As for society, it is much stronger and healthier when relationships are loving, open and approved. Gender limitations, nature and biology are not really an issue nowadays. Because many lesbian couples get pregnant by donors or adopt and most gay couples either adopt or use surrogate mothers to have children. Adopting might not be quite as populating but more importantly it gives a stable home to those who need one.

Following on from Helmer’s main argument, gay marriage is no different to traditional marriage plus it is still a relation between three – the couple and the society – the couple here just happens to be of the same gender. Nevertheless, they still have the same relationship with their society. Like traditional marriage, gay marriage also gets its strength from its recognition, respect and the financial benefits the state affords it.

That’s why I am not surprised David Cameron gave it his approval, he is a champion of marriage and it would have been hypocritical of him to exclude gay – marriage!

Where I disagree with Mr. Helmer the most is in his final point, because broadening the definition of marriage to include gay relationships will actually strengthen and deepen the institution of marriage which in recent years has been sidelined for cohabiting. I know what I’m about to say will anger some people, but cohabiting isn’t always built on the same commitment as marriage. That piece of paper (marriage certificate) plus the public display of commitment to each other is stronger than many of us give it credit. And that strength reflects on the family nucleus – if the family, as Mr. Helmer says is the bedrock of society – which I strongly believe it is – then more committed unions are better for our communities.

Many studies have shown children mostly need love stability and to be raised by people who care about them, the parents’ gender or how the children were created had little to nothing to do with that stability.

I find it’s always best to allow people to speak their mind and regardless of what they say it is best to listen then rationally refute their arguments than shout to shut them up.