|As did freethinkers|
There is one major unresolved issue. The State has a responsibility to protect and support parents who marry and take on the risks and responsibilities of bringing children into the world. Does the State now intend to walk away from its historic role of upholding the unique contribution which a man and woman make to society when they marry and generate new life, as only they can, thereby continuing the human race? If not, what does it intend to do in this regard?
Anyone have a clue as to what he is talking about? He mentioned something like this in a prior letter.
If the referendum is approved, the most immediate consequence is that the state would no longer grant special support and recognition of the irreplaceable contribution and sacrifice that wives and husbands make to society today as mothers and fathers who bring to life, rear and educate the next generation.
But I'm still not getting it. What is the state taking away from wives and husbands who have children? What exactly is the "historic role of upholding the unique contribution which a man and woman make to society when they marry and generate new life"?
Do the half of the couples that stay married get something more from the state than the half who divorce? Is the state withholding something from the couples who don't have children and therefore are not continuing the human race? If a childless couple adopts one or more children, does the state have the same historic role as if the couple had their own natural born children? Isn't it cool that in the questions I just asked, the respective genders of the married couple don't matter?