I haven’t gotten too political in a long time, so I guess now is as good a time as any. I have been closely following the gay marriage case in California over the past year because for one I am genuinely interested in the case, but also because I loosely know Paul Katami, the gay man who filed the case along with the two Bush/Gore rock star attorneys.
I think the issue of gay marriage is incredibly difficult and while I do think there are several almost laughable flaws in the logic of those opposing it, I don’t think it is a clear cut issue by any means. First off, just like the “governator”, Arnold Schwarzenegger, I do appreciate that California will soon allow gay marriages to take place. I do think in some respects it is a civil rights issue and to deny people who clearly are in love and it is within their personal biology to be physically attracted to each other, is wrong. I do agree with Arnold that to do otherwise would be discriminatory. All meaningful relationships between two individuals who love each other, should be treated with dignity and respect, regardless of whether you believe it should be considered a “marriage” or not. Two people who have decided to join together and share their lives, regardless of their sex, should have every right to do so. They should have every right to have that relationship recognized by the government in the same way a traditional (whatever that means) marriage is recognized. Because the problem is that if you don’t allow that to happen, it creates a divide within our nation, it can create unnecessary pain in peoples lives when they can’t do things like visit each other in a hospital and other absurd things like that, and it doesn’t allow people to protect themselves (by law) should their partner and them decide to separate.
I also do agree that this is a civil rights issue, for the most part anyway. I don’t think it is as clear cut as Brown vs. the Board of Education, however, it is clear that to allow people of the opposite sex to “marry” but not people of the same sex, when there is nothing in the constitution that allows for such blatant discrimination, is a huge mistake. Opponents have tried to come up with a plethora of arguments that they say “clearly” show that marriage should be between a man and a woman, but that is usually when I read and burst into laughter. One argument is that it is important to mankind that marriage stay between a man and a woman for the sake of the children that a couple may choose to have. But the obvious counter argument is that A. it is not a prerequisite of marriage to reproduce B. studies on kids being raised by same sex couples and opposite couples, and how that affects their development, is fuzzy at best and C. What do you say about two 65 year olds who want to become married and are incapable of reproducing? Long story short, children should not be part of the argument when people are allowed to marry who have no designs on having children.
Another laughable argument is basically anything where the bible is quoted. Now I actually happen to consider myself a Christian, but that is simply a belief I have that I am only hoping is correct. I did not see Jesus with my own eyes. He did not give me a whole lot to go off of other than a book where anyone with half a brain knows down deep has a lot of complete nonsense in it. The evidence for Christianity is fuzzy at best and most of the world does not believe in Christianity. And even if none of the points I just made are accurate, there is something in our constitution that so many people conveniently forget that says there is a “separation of church and state.” So basically no matter if Jesus came down to earth tonight and said marriage is defined as being between a man and a woman, it is irrelevant. It is as clear as can be, there is a separation of church and state. Religion has absolutely nothing to do with this. This is a matter of whether it is discriminatory to allow a man and a woman to “marry”, but not a man and a man or a woman and another woman.
So while this may all look one sided and that I am completely pro gay marriage, let me carry on. I think there are a few flaws with current law and logic of those who are in favor of gay marriage. First off, the numbers show that the majority of people actually are in favor of at the very least allowing gay people to create a “civil union” of some kind. So clearly the majority does not want to create undue hardship on gay people even though they may not want to see them allowed to be “married.” People still are hung up on the word “marriage” as having some sort of sacred meaning. But the mistake I think the country is making is even “marrying” anyone in the first place. I think any two people who can demonstrate that they are in love and committed to each other should be allowed to officially form an official relationship with the state that entitles them to the perks what a civil union or marriage currently affords. But I do not think that the state should call it a “marriage.” If they just called it something else, I think this whole debate would be way less heated. Because most people who are anti gay marriage are probably of the mind that their heterosexual relationship is superior to a gay relationship and somehow feel that calling a gay marriage a “marriage,” cheapens the word somehow. But you see the problem is, heterosexual couples have already cheapened the word and gay people have nothing to do with that. When over half of marriages end in divorce, that cheapens the word. When people have 3 or 4 or 5 marriages in their lifetimes, that cheapens the word. When people get married in a courthouse and not in some kind of church, that cheapens the word to a lot religious folks. When people get married for publicity reasons (like those two psychos Spencer and Heidi aka “Speidi”) then that cheapens the meaning of the word marriage. Sorry to all of the heterosexuals out there, but we already cheapened the word ourselves.
Another MAJOR flaw I see is directly comparing this case to Brown vs. the Board of Education or other landmark civil rights cases. There seems to be this notion amongst those in favor of gay marriage that those who oppose it will one day be shunned the way an outrageously racist person might be today. Well, as I say that, it depends where you live. I think the closer you live to the middle of the country the more inclined you are to get away with being obviously racist, but along the coasts anyway, you would be treated as an outcast if you were to fly a confederate flag or something along those lines. My prediction is that down the line, while more and more people will be much more lax towards the idea of gay marriage, I reject the notion that people will be treated as being borderline nuts if they are not in favor of gays being allowed to be “married.” I think the word “marriage” can mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people. For some, marriage may only be between a man and a woman and conducted in a church. For others, they simply believe that the word marriage is quite literally defined (as in there is a dictionary definition) as being between a man and a woman. To others, they may think that anatomically it only makes sense that a man and a woman should be together and therefore they are the only ones who should be allowed to “officially” join together. There are others who believe that allowing men to marry may open up a can of worms. They may go so far as to say it is a matter of national security. If men are allowed to marry other men, then an American with terrorist ties could just marry an Al Qaeda extremist which would then make the Al Qaeda guy an American citizen!
Clearly there is a lot that needs to be worked out from a legal standpoint before this became a nationwide thing. Also what is clear, to me anyway, is that people should not be made to feel bad ever for opposing gay marriage. I think there are very good arguments that can be made (although it seems that few people actually make the good ones, they usually make the retarded ones, at least publicly anyway). I think time will prove that people will have varying opinions, but that most will agree that allowing gay people to “marry” does not affect their own heterosexual marriage nor will it “ruin the perpetuation of the human race” as one of the defense attorney put it LOL. News flash to that moron, we have 6 billion people on earth and ALL scientists will agree that humans multiplying at this pace will cause great harm to the earth and to human beings in general over time.
This is a difficult issue and when this case makes it to the supreme court and wins, (I am confident they will not overturn it) then ultimately to the lawmakers, that to me is when the debate will actually get interesting. Because at that point we will all debate what protections we need to have to keep someone from gay marrying an Al Qaeda leader and what do you do about transgenders? While it is obvious that almost all gay people are born gay, the research appears fuzzier when it comes to transgenders. I think that is not going to be a slam dunk decision by any means, and there is potential for people on both sides to get hurt no matter what is decided.
So to wrap all of this up I think we need to all respect each others relationships, the constitution, and to put it in the most basic terms, be kind to each other. This is a tough call, but clearly trying to make each other feel like less than a human if we happen to be on one side or another is not helping anything. If we were talking about race, then I don’t mind bashing the hell out of the other side because anyone who thinks that because someone is black (or Hispanic or Asian etc.) that they are stupid or that they steal or whatever else they use to justify their beliefs, they are a moron and deserve whatever comes their way. But this is clearly a much more complex and difficult issue and you shouldn’t be made to feel bad no matter what side you are on. I think what frustrates gay people is not when they oppose them, but rather when they oppose them for reasons that make no sense. But those who have well thought out logical reasons for opposing same sex marriage should not be made to feel bad. If your argument is “I don’t want them to get married cause they disgust me”, well then you probably deserve the same treatment as the openly racist guy. But if you have obviously legitimate concerns, I think you should stand by them, but do so with an open mind.
