Thread:Comments:French Senate vote in support of same-sex marriage/Redefining "marriage" silences ideas that the queer community finds inconvenient.

This is all about silencing. It is not about civil rights. It is about silencing ideas that the queer community finds to be inconvenient. "Marriage" refers to "the marriage norm", which defines the rights and duties of a mated male and female. Mating is part of the reproductive "subsystem" of human beings and other mammals as well as all other animals and many plant species. The coupling of a male and a female involves emotional and psychological changes that all promote the care for and feeding of children. The male-female couple is a form of intimacy that is important and distinct.

What we are seeing today is not a sudden enlightenment of the world's population. We are seeing the effect of mobbing, of thought control promoted and facilitated by the mass media and the coercive power of the state, hijacked by a special interest: the queer community.

This attempt to silence the marriage norm by redefining the word "marriage", using the coercive force of the State, is going to backfire and become celebrated as "Exhibit #1" exposing the moral effluent flowing from the queer community like a volcano and raining down on all of humanity, wreaking havoc.

It is selfish. It is illogical. It is not going to work. It is going to harm many people who identify themselves as queer. It is going to result in a dramatic increase in hate. Hate has a function in society. The queers have gone too far in this, and the response is going to be like a coal mine fire. Once such a fire is ignited, it is impossible to extinguish until every last bit of coal has been consumed.

I am not writing this to encourage acts of hate against queers. I am writing to plead with you all to engage in a vigorous and respectful discussion in which all viewpoints, including mine, are given serious consideration.

Please post your opinion about the following idea: The best way to promote liberty, in which government is not involved in enforcing any group's views about sexual mores, is to elevate the concept of "civil union" in law and in society, without attempting to redefine "marriage" or any other word. The queer community should concede that the mated male-female couple is a distinct and important form of intimacy. The queer community should concede that people should be free to express the opinion that sexual intimacy outside of that context is immoral. The language must not be altered, using the coercive force of the State, in ways that would prevent the expression of ideas involving sexual mores.

If the queer community is really interested in promoting liberty and justice, then it must abandon its efforts to silence its critics by redefining words to make those criticisms inexpressible.