Few Gays Opt to Marry

December 11, 2007

gayrcmp.png

by Henry Makow Ph.D.


Despite the example set by these Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers, less than one-in-20 gays took advantage of Canada's decision to legalize marriage in June 2005, according to a census a year later.

Gays make up just 0.1% of all married couples, a proportion which is consistent with other countries that permit same-sex marriage.

In other words, the definition of the most important heterosexual institution was changed to satisfy one couple in one thousand.

This information is crucial to Americans where only Massachusetts permits same-sex marriage but as many as eleven other states are considering it.

In terms of numbers, Statistics Canada calculated that about one percent of the Canadian population are gay or bisexual, well below the estimates we normally hear. (StasCan Daily "Community Health Survey" , June 15 2004, p. 9) This works out to 316,900 people. The 2006 census found 7465 married same-sex couples, fewer than 15,000 men and women.

Roughly a quarter of Canadian gays (75,000) prefer "common law" relationships. There is no way to gauge their permanence or exclusivity.

The vast majority of homosexuals don't want gay marriage. It is being foisted on them and on society by elite  social engineers using the media, government and a few activists. The goal is to undermine heterosexual marriage by obscuring its true character. The purpose is to destroy the family and render society more vulnerable to world government dictatorship by the central bankers.

GAYS DON'T WANT MARRIAGE

The majority of gays regard same-sex marriage as a diversion from more important issues.
This view is expressed by Gareth Kirby in an editorial in Capital Xtra, an Ottawa gay newspaper, Oct. 18, 2007.

"Remember the headlines...that claimed we were flocking to city hall and churches to get the deed done as courts legalized same-sex marriage in province after province? ...It was a lie. Very few among us are eager to embrace marriage rights...

"Didn't we just spend a decade and by some estimates $2 million to wage wage this fight? Didn't we just put all our other major issues virtually on ice because some couples, a few lawyers, and a couple of out-of-touch lobby groups decided that same-sex marriage was the only thing that really mattered...

"Marriage is a heterosexual institution designed by the church, endorse by the state, with the intention of controlling the sexuality of women and by extension, their husbands...

"I don't expect the wedding rate will pick up. We have something better in our relationships, something that allows for a variety of friendships, fuck buddies, lovers, sisters and ex's. We don 't put all the pressures on one person...

"We don't need the limitations of marriage. So we're taking a pass. But what waste of time and money, and a tragic diversion of focus, in that decade-long fight."

As Kirby suggests, being gay is about not marrying and being monogamous. It is farcical and tragic that heterosexual society should be sacrificed on the altar of gay marriage. Marriage-minded gays should be given a separate status with equal benefits and responsibilities.


THE MEDIA LOVES GAY MARRIAGE


The Canadian media has ignored the tepid gay response to marriage and tried instead to create the impression that traditional marriage is on the rocks. The fact the mass media is singing from an identical song sheet is further proof that it is directed by the central banking cartel.

In an article in The Hill Times (Sept. 24, 2007) Tom Korski writes:

[The media] "depicted gay Canadians enthusiastically embracing traditional roles at the exact moment the rest of society spirals into family dysfunction."

'Thank heavens for gay marriage,' wrote Globe and Mail columnist Margaret Went. 'Without it, the most ancient of our social institutions would be in even worse decline than it already is.'

Other journalists advised readers "the nuclear family is fading away," (Edmonton Sun) and that "same sex couples are taking the reins" (CTV.ca), or mocked the myth of the perfect family," (Vancouver Sun) and lamented "there is no such thing as traditional family anymore." (Moose Jaw Times Herald)

In one comically inelegant phrase CTV National's Lloyd Robertson told viewers, "If you're part of a so-called traditional family where the children are raised by a mother and father who are married, you seem to be in a declining breed." (End of Korski)

Meanwhile the gay lobby behind the legalization of same-sex marriage is releasing statistics that exaggerate the number of gay marriages by about %65. This lobby is called "Egale" and it is funded by IBM and a number of other anonymous corporations, as well as by the federal government.


CONCLUSION

Today, people who advance in the fields of government, education, media and big business generally belong to a colonial elite. They represent the London-based Masonic-Zionist central banking cartel which is colonizing us all in a 1984-style "world government." They are waging psychological war on society to undermine our ability to resist.

The nuclear family is the basic building block of society. We derive our identity, meaning, values and security from it. Heterosexual marriage is the basis for raising the new generation to be productive responsible citizens. It is based on the exchange of female power for male love which awakens the man's protective and constructive instincts. It is an essential step in our personal development and fulfillment.

The promotion of gay marriage has nothing to do with the welfare of homosexuals. As with feminism,it is designed to increase sex-role confusion, divorce, and depopulation. By conflating hetero and homosexual marriage, straights are being encouraged to emulate gays, who generally are not monogamous and do not have children. This is part of a wider attack on our gender identity (i.e. masculinity and femininity.)

Did we need to legalize gay marriage to accommodate one couple in one thousand? No. The central bankers
legalized it to destroy the nuclear family and change societal norms. By arresting our personal development, they are ensuring that humanity remains under their tutelage, a perpetual under-achiever.
----
Note: I am indebted to the Nov. Dec 2007 issue of Reality. This publication is sponsored by the Real Women of Canada www.realwomenca.com  I highly recommend it.


See also my: "Canada Redefines Marriage"

and "Heterosexual Society is Under Siege"


Comments for "Few Gays Opt to Marry"

Rob said (December 15, 2007):

A few years ago, when the Gay Marriage laws were still being debated, I had the opportunity to witness from my highrise apartment, some 50,000 Christian protesters decend upon the streets surrounding Vancouver's Court House - it was quite the sight to see, and then around 50 gays showed up, two were dressed in a tux/wedding dress and they held a mock wedding trying to enrage the Christian crowd, but the crowd stayed peaceful, although the Police did show up. At any rate, for the Courthouse being only 2 blocks from Davie Street (the heart of the Gay Community), the pittance of activists out of the thousands of gays in the immediate area illustrates how few consider it to be an issue.

I have discussed the issue with some of my gay friends, and it seems to be only a few of the very young in the community that are for gay marriage - they are also the most loonie and flamboyant of gays. Many of those that I know are very low-key normal people who are doctors, stockbrokers, lawyers etc, and this crowd is NOT too keen on the idea of gay marriage, and expressed concerns about homosexual relationships becoming the gong-show which heterosexual relationships have become.

Many have been married heterosexually before, and are fully aware of the myriad of laws that the government has imposed upon heterosexual life via marriage. Before gay marriage, gay relationships were pretty free from all of the BS we deal with in straight relationships. A well to do gay man would often take in a "room-mate" for a while, and have serial relationships of this nature. But, with making gay relationships "equal" to straight relationships, many of these people are worried about having to fork over money to their common-law lovers, and all of the other laws which the government has introduced into relationships. It seems that those who are most in favour of gay marriage are also often the poorest with the least bright futures - and the more affluent gays are well aware of this. They are aware that gay marriage also means gay divorce.

The more affluent gays are also aware that government laws have seriously hampered hetero relationships, and are in no way keen to have their lifestyle hampered in the same way. Many find the gay "lifestyle" within the community to be refreshing, as it is so different from hetero lifestyle, and they fear that gay marriage will alter the state of their community. There are some that have been in long term relationships, but most are not. Even though they are fairly low key and not flamboyant, they still enjoy the ease of promiscuousness in the community, and the multiple sex partners. Many are quite aware that gay marriage/hetero relationship laws descending into the gay community could have an effect of ending their chosen lifestyle.


Kevin said (December 14, 2007):

Marriage is the complimentary union of husband and wife, and the sanctification of human sexuality for life, as defined in Genesis. Indeed,
if marriage IS "endorse[d] by the State, then marriage can be whatever is "legally" contrived, like "gay marriage" for instance, which is an
oxymoron. The form of marriage between husband and wife is defined by our Creator, not "designed by the Church." Marriage is not about external control, nor is it an "institution." Marriage
is a principle and a commitment which is commensurate with the natural and spiritual orders of creation, and a separation and affirmation of species and gender.
The fact is, Church mandated marital protocols,
have sullied the conceptions many hold OF
marriage, especially women.

It must be made clear... Women are an equal and full participant in our Creator's conception of Adam (the first man is gender neutral).
In fact, woman is taken "out of" Adam, that she would of independent volition, affirm the totality and very existence OF Adam. A wife, in
Genesis, represents a completion of Adam as one, which is an essential characteristic of the Unity and Perfection of G-d.

"And G-d created man in His own Image, in the Image of G-d created He him (man); male and female created He them."
[Bereshith/Genesis 1:27] Both the "him, and "them" are consecrated unions of male and female - husband and wife. Marriage is a Divine schematic.


Rob said (December 14, 2007):

Don't know if you remember me, but we have talked before, though a while ago. I read your last article about homosexuality, and thought it was fantastic. I live in downtown Vancouver, in the heart of the Gay Community and I am friends with many of them though I am heterosexual, and you are exactly right - most gays do not think too highly of Gay Marriage. There is something rotten in Vancouver, Henry, and here are some quotes that show the Marxism of Gay Rights Activists. (Is it any wonder that feminists support gay rights? Marxist see, Marxist do!)

http://no-maam.blogspot.com/2007/03/in-their-own-words.html

"Feminism is the theory, lesbianism is the practice." -- Ti-Grace Atkinson

“Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so. … Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family, and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society. … As a lesbian, I am fundamentally different from non-lesbian women. …In arguing for the right to legal marriage, lesbians and gay men would be forced to claim that we are just like heterosexual couples, have the same goals and purposes, and vow to structure our lives similarly. … We must keep our eyes on the goals of providing true alternatives to marriage and of radically reordering society's view of reality.” -- Paula Ettelbrick, “Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?”, in William Rubenstein, ed., Lesbians, Gay Men and the Law (New York: The New Press, 1993), pp. 401-405.

"A middle ground might be to fight for same sex marriage and its benefits, and then, once granted, redefine the institution completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society's moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution." -- Michelangelo Signorile, "Bridal Wave," OUT Magazine, December/January 1994, p.161
.
"It [gay marriage] is also a chance to wholly transform the definition of family in American culture. It is the final tool with which to dismantle all sodomy statutes, get education about homosexuality and AIDS into public schools, and, in short, usher in a sea of change in how society views and treats us." -- Michelangelo Signorile, "I do, I do, I do, I do, I do," OUT Magazine, May 1996, p.30
.
"[E]nlarging the concept to embrace same-sex couples would necessarily transform it into something new....Extending the right to marry to gay people -- that is, abolishing the traditional gender requirements of marriage -- can be one of the means, perhaps the principal one, through which the institution divests itself of the sexist trappings of the past." -- Tom Stoddard, quoted in Roberta Achtenberg, et al, "Approaching 2000: Meeting the Challenges to San Francisco's Families," The Final Report of the Mayor's Task Force on Family Policy, City and County of San Francisco, June 13, 1990, p.1.


Paul said (December 13, 2007):

Henry I'm a Gay man in a twenty three year monagamous, committed relationship (and a Truth Seeker reader). Your article on gay Marriage is a beauty. I found myself in pretty much full agreement with what you were saying. We have no interest in marriage, and never saw it as an issue. Still don't. We won't be having kids obviously so for us marriage would just be a validation of our relationship. We already have that every day we are together, we don't need to advertise it to the world. The Gay Marriage agenda has come from somewhere else, not from people like us. I find it all a trifle embarrassing really. I know too many queens who can't even conduct a grown-up relationship with their right hand let alone another person, and we are now seeing way too many hetero relationships breaking down around us as well. Too much enforced culture of selfishness and hedonism being pushed on all of us, and too much temptation for transient (ultimately meaningless) pleasures. And I'm sick to death of self appointed activists always telling us what it is we want.


Dan said (December 13, 2007):

Obviously. That's what makes the gay marriage debate so absurd. It's a PR op aimed at heterosexuals.

Gay marriage is a technicality which enables gays legal benefits. Civil service and some private sector jobs cover a spouse on group health
insurance and pension plans. Another big plumb is married 'couples' are favored in standing child adoption laws, for homosexuals and lesbians
who desire children.

All gays are promiscuous. I've known old gay 'couples', and their lifestyle invariably included multiple partners - invariably younger ones.


Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at