In what is sure to be regarded as a controversial article, Paul Rosnick, a 30-year-old gay man, makes the case that a big secret looms amongst the LGBT community -- not all of them are for same-sex marriage. Fearing that he might become a target of the "Gaystapo" for writing such an article, Rosnick writes under a pseudonym for The Federalist.
"[T]here is nothing in this world I want more than to be a father and raise a family," Rosnick admits. "Yet I can’t seem to bring myself to celebrate the triumph of same-sex marriage."
And that's the "big secret" he shares with what he says are a "significant number" of other homosexuals. The reason he says those voices aren't louder is because of gay rights activists -- "most of whom are straight" -- who "have a history of viciously stamping out any trace of individualism within the gay community."
Rosnick is staunchly against the idea perpetrated by activists that same-sex relationships are no different than heterosexual ones. "It's about time we realize this very basic truth and stop pretending that all relationships are created equal," he writes.
In Rosnick's view, too many people view marriage "as little more than a love contract." If that is indeed what marriage is reduced to, then by all means, he says, allow homosexuals to marry. But, he asks: "If marriage is little more than a love contract, why do we need government to get involved? Why was government invited to regulate marriages but not other interpersonal relationships, like friendships? Why does every religion hold marriage to be a sacred and divine institution? Surely marriage must be more than just a love contract."
And that it is. Traditional marriages produce babies and that, Rosnick says, is why government involved itself in the arrangement. And the creation of new life between a male and a female is what differentiates true marriage from any other:
Redefining marriage to include same-sex couples relegates this once noble institution to nothing more than a lousy love contract. This harms all of society by turning marriage, the bedrock of society, into a meaningless anachronism.
But Rosnick's next section may be the most poignant to homosexual men, namely putting aside their own desires and putting the needs of a child first:
I have always wanted to be a father. I would give just about anything for the chance to have kids. But the first rule of fatherhood is that a good dad will put the needs of his children before his own—and every child needs a mom and a dad. Period. I could never forgive myself for ripping a child away from his mother so I could selfishly live out my dreams… Let’s raise them in homes where they can enjoy having both a mom and a dad. We owe them that.
There are others who have shared Rosnick's sentiments. One was also featured in The Federalist and was previously reported here at TruthRevolt. Heather Barwick was raised by two mothers and is now an outspoken critic of same-sex marriage, saying that having no father in her life created a "huge hole" in her life. Barwick is also a children's advocate speaking up for those who are hurting by being silenced by a community that demands agreement.
In another case, also reported here, a Canadian woman whose rearing under a promiscuous homosexual father led her to the conclusion that same-sex marriage is in the business of "promoting adults' desires" over the rights of children to be raised by their biological parents warned that same-sex marriage has changed freedom in Canada profoundly and that once fully established in America, the Land of the Free will be increasingly less free.