5 Nov 08

Let me preface this article by saying that this is a very controversial topic, for which I make no apologies. The topic: gay rights, more specifically and timely, gay marriage.

I know what you’re thinking, “Oh Great! Another one!” Well, sort of, but I hope I can clarify some important issues.

This is not an argument. This is not an opinion. This is not a moral issue. This IS a human rights issue. This is a citizens’ rights issue. This is a state and federal contract law issue. Applying laws against gay rights is enforcing bigoted hateful policy. Does that give you any idea where I stand? :)

So, deeper into the issue, other than just feelings, I’d like to point out some of the “arguments” against gay rights:

  1. God made One Man and One Woman to marry – to this I’d like to point out one of our country’s deepest and most important foundries: the separation of Church and State. One’s religious views should not dictate legal policy. The church does not dictate the protections and rights given by marriage, those privileges and rights are given by civil law.
  2. Gay Marriage will damage heterosexual marriage – with nearly 50% divorce rate in the United States, I can’t see that Gay Marriage is going to affect heterosexual marriage. What is affecting the institution of marriage in the US is the lack of commitment to one’s spouse. Will gay marriage damage the institution because more men will say, “Well, now that I don’t have to marry a woman…”? This is a weak argument.
  3. If we allow gays to marry, next we’ll be welcoming bestiality, polygamy and incestuous marriage – so, one at a time here: Bestiality, are they serious about making having sex with animals the equivalent of two committed and loving individuals wanting to contractually join their lives? What tax benefits are being kept from folks practicing bestiality? Do they feel hurt that a doctor won’t let them visit their favorite animal while it’s at the vet? Where’s the association here? Polygamy, the problem for me here isn’t a moral issue, I can’t argue with anyone who wants to punish themselves by having more than one spouse! Don’t we have enough marriage woes without adding multiples? However, I would bet that the basis of Polygamy is actually ownership. However, I could be swayed on this one if women were also allowed to have multiple husbands. We are equal opportunity after all! But, since this argument is predominantly coming from Mormon fundamentalists, I highly doubt “equal opportunity” has anything to do with it. So now the fun one, allowing brothers and sisters (immediate family members) to marry and procreate. Well, other than this being a “moral” issue, I think the real argument here is actually for health and welfare of our species! Incestuous activity breeds fundamental flaws into the genes of any species. Gays can’t actually breed, so I hardly believe that health and welfare issue can be assimilated.
  4. DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) protects traditional marriage: How can this law be taken seriously? So, I can sign a binding business contract in Maryland and that contract will still be in force in the state of Washington, but yet a marriage contract between my partner and I can never be recognized? Incorporating your company in Delaware allows you to still maintain that corporation while your entire operation is technically based in Chicago. So, we haven’t addressed the legality of tax shelters across state boarders, but it’s still a good idea that legitimate, loving couples who wish to protect one another in a committed long-term relationship should be completely barred from any legal rights or protections. (P.S. Thank you President Clinton)
  5. Why would we give gays special rights? SPECIAL rights??? What’s special about equality? What’s special about allowing equal access to all citizens? Is it so unreasonable to believe or to understand that homosexuals are citizens? That we are in the Constitution and in the Declaration of Independence?Giving gays a true minority status is unnecessary – Is there a minority group in the USA right now who are more abused than our homosexuals? Who are more discriminated against? Are we resisting the minority status because we’re worried about an equal opportunity or the ability to participate as full and equal citizens because we don’t want more “special” rights for more citizens? I would guess the same people resisting minority status for gays are the same people who really don’t believe blacks or Hispanics should have “special” treatment either. After all I’m sure they are completely behind the American ideology of capitalism and “pulling yourself up by your boot straps”.

I hope if you’ve ever said to yourself, “This argument doesn’t involve me,” that you’ll truly consider helping this next big step toward genuine equality. If you believe it doesn’t involve you, then choose to speak up for those who are being treated so unfairly. Open your hearts and your minds to the possibility that THIS discrimination is the first step toward another segregated society. Segregated right in front of your eyes! If you cringe at the thought of slavery, if you squirm just thinking about the atrocities inflicted on our Native American tribes, then perhaps you can open up to the possibility that this situation is NOT all that different… it’s just modernized. As we look back on those terrible times in our nation’s history, will we also look back and so easily see the similarities to this one?

Life: give us the rights we’ve earned by being citizens of our country to live openly, honestly, and safely

Liberty: give us the freedoms granted to our straight counterparts, the freedom to fully participate in legal system

and the Pursuit of Happiness: give us the right to “live happily ever after”, happiness is only truly attained by living comfortably, feeling unthreatened, loved.


Filed under: Uncategorized

Trackback Uri

  • Robguy

    Thanks for the support. I have a few things to add.

    Bestiality – Fido and Fluffy aren’t able to enter into a legal contract, therefore they can’t marry (unless you live in India or some other country where both parties don’t have to consent).

    Polygamy – I think people focus on love and legal protections when they talk about marriage, but it also opens you up to liabilities. If your spouse runs up all your credit cards, you’re part of that debt. If you marry Sally, and Sally decides she also wants to marry George – are you also, in effect, marrying George? Do all spouses have to agree to the change in the marriage? What if one of you wants a divorce from the 3rd party but the other doesn’t? It’s something that our legal system would need to sort out, whereas a one to one marriage is something that is well established.

    Incest – laws don’t allow you to marry your sister, but are there actually laws that punish you if you have children with her? I mean, eww, but are there?

    Breeding – I hear way too many people say that gays can’t have children like we’re born without sex organs. I have 2 girls with a lesbian couple. We didn’t have sex or go see a doctor – It’s a very simple thing.

    I think most evangelicals are simply afraid that they will lose their “right” to deny the rights of groups they don’t like. It’s a christian thing.

  • Robguy

    Thanks for the support. I have a few things to add. Bestiality – Fido and Fluffy aren’t able to enter into a legal contract, therefore they can’t marry (unless you live in India or some other country where both parties don’t have to consent). Polygamy – I think people focus on love and legal protections when they talk about marriage, but it also opens you up to liabilities. If your spouse runs up all your credit cards, you’re part of that debt. If you marry Sally, and Sally decides she also wants to marry George – are you also, in effect, marrying George? Do all spouses have to agree to the change in the marriage? What if one of you wants a divorce from the 3rd party but the other doesn’t? It’s something that our legal system would need to sort out, whereas a one to one marriage is something that is well established.Incest – laws don’t allow you to marry your sister, but are there actually laws that punish you if you have children with her? I mean, eww, but are there?Breeding – I hear way too many people say that gays can’t have children like we’re born without sex organs. I have 2 girls with a lesbian couple. We didn’t have sex or go see a doctor – It’s a very simple thing.I think most evangelicals are simply afraid that they will lose their “right” to deny the rights of groups they don’t like. It’s a christian thing.

  • A

    I think the Iowa Supreme Court said it best when it stated something along the lines that if a reason to not allow to people to marry was because they are going to raise children then many people should not be allowed to marry for that reason.

    There is a difference between a civil marriage recognized by the laws of a state and a religious marriage. If a church does not want to recognize gay marriage that is the church and its religion’s choice because we live in a country with a separation of church and state (at least we’re supposed to), however that does not give the state the right to discriminate against these couples. There is no reason not to allow gay and lesbian couples to marry. In fact, some of them have better functioning marriages than some heterosexual couples.

  • A

    I think the Iowa Supreme Court said it best when it stated something along the lines that if a reason to not allow to people to marry was because they are going to raise children then many people should not be allowed to marry for that reason.There is a difference between a civil marriage recognized by the laws of a state and a religious marriage. If a church does not want to recognize gay marriage that is the church and its religion’s choice because we live in a country with a separation of church and state (at least we’re supposed to), however that does not give the state the right to discriminate against these couples. There is no reason not to allow gay and lesbian couples to marry. In fact, some of them have better functioning marriages than some heterosexual couples.