Gay Marriage
So Steph came down to 'Bana last night and decided to get me started on the issue of gay marriage, so now I'm going to rant about it. So, if you don't want to hear my Right Wing Propaganda, skip this whole thing and read something wholesome like The Charles Manson Story or The Dahmer Diaries. If you'd rather not delve into the twisted depths of the mind of the serial killer, then hear me out. =)
I don't like homosexuality. In fact, it's a sin according to my belief system and it's revolting. I see it as a psychopathy in which men or women find themselves inexplicably attracted to the prospect of sex and incapable of communicating romantically with members of the opposite sex. So, they work within their mental safety net, and build relationships with same sex partners. Maybe it's a conscious choice, maybe not. Even chronic addiction can be overcome with the force of a strong will alone. I've broken myself of a number of habits, and said no to a number of offers to things which I know are wrong, and I see homosexuality as a disease of the weak minded. If you don't agree, fine. I respect your opinion, so long as you don't attempt to impose it on me. I know gay men, and can tolerate gay men, but do not ask me to accept the fact that the very thing which defines their lives, sodomy, when I consider it a sin. In fact, many states consider it illegal.
So, about gay marriage. I don't believe in it. I believe that "marriage" is a Christian term relating to a Christian ritual that unites a man and a woman before God. My God doesn't accept homosexuality, so why the hell should they be allowed to marry in a sinful state? It's just that simple. Again, if you don't agree with my religious beliefs, fine. I ask that you respect them, however, and don't push your political agenda in my face and tell me with the same act that my religion is wrong. I don't go around pushing my religious beliefs on others, do me the same courtesy.
So, I hate gay people and want to deny them the right to happiness, right? No, quite the opposite. My government, which I believe in (regardless of the politics of the times), is founded on the protection of the right to happiness for all people, and I believe homosexuals are no less deserving of that right. In fact, I believe very strongly in civil unions as a method to extend the same rights to committed homosexual couples that are extended to married couples. They should have visitation rights at hospitals and prisons. They should receive the same tax status as two married individuals. They should be seen legally as one entity, should they wish that, just as with the legal status of a married couple. I would extend all of these rights and priveleges happily to committed gay couples.
So what's the catch? I refuse to call it "marriage." Marriage is a religious term as much as it is a legal term. The legal term is taken from the religious term, which is where the confusion begins. As marriage is a religious term, and the state is separate from religion, the idea of legalizing homosexual marriage is already dealt with in the Constitution, in saying that the government is established to grant and protect rights, not to protect or remove religious institutions. Legal marriage, such as in a marriage certificate is separate from a ceremony in a church. I believe that the rights given by a marriage certificate to hetero couples could be extended to gay couples, just don't call it marriage, because it is not.
The only reason this is a controversial issue at all is because, quite frankly, heterosexual people are sick and tired of gay pride. We don't give a rat's ass what two guys do in the bedroom, to be quite honest, and if you're doing something we consider nasty, we don't want to have it shoved in our faces. We don't want to see gay pride parades, flags, stickers, ribbons, T-shirts, or any other symbol of an act that we think is wrong and honestly, should be kept private. We don't have straight pride parades and T-shirts. We don't have Straight Day at Disney World (but they do have Gay Day), and honestly, we don't want it. Keep it out of our government, because it's a personal choice and doesn't belong there.
Gay people see it differently though. They see these symbols as opportunities to feel like what they are doing doesn't disgust millions of the people around them. They see this as an opportunity to justify their decision and find strength from others who've made the same decision. They think that by making a huge scene, by dressing as women or in BDSM leathers and chains, that they are somehow empowered. They think they are making a statement that regardless of our opinions, we have to accept them, and in doing so cross the line into pushing your personal beliefs onto me, and I draw the line. The thing is, they have groups like the ACLU who thinks that I should be required by law to tolerate their behavior, and these groups try to push their views into law, so the government needs to step in, and say "No, sorry. We respect your views and will hear them, but we will not force the majority of this country to agree with you when they do not."
Gay rights is a simple issue. Are they people? Are they American citizens? Yes? Then they have those rights already established in the Constitution. Any further legislation is a political statement meant to piss off the Christian right, and that has no business in our lawbooks. Establish civil unions to guarantee the rights not already guaranteed and be done with it.
I don't like homosexuality. In fact, it's a sin according to my belief system and it's revolting. I see it as a psychopathy in which men or women find themselves inexplicably attracted to the prospect of sex and incapable of communicating romantically with members of the opposite sex. So, they work within their mental safety net, and build relationships with same sex partners. Maybe it's a conscious choice, maybe not. Even chronic addiction can be overcome with the force of a strong will alone. I've broken myself of a number of habits, and said no to a number of offers to things which I know are wrong, and I see homosexuality as a disease of the weak minded. If you don't agree, fine. I respect your opinion, so long as you don't attempt to impose it on me. I know gay men, and can tolerate gay men, but do not ask me to accept the fact that the very thing which defines their lives, sodomy, when I consider it a sin. In fact, many states consider it illegal.
So, about gay marriage. I don't believe in it. I believe that "marriage" is a Christian term relating to a Christian ritual that unites a man and a woman before God. My God doesn't accept homosexuality, so why the hell should they be allowed to marry in a sinful state? It's just that simple. Again, if you don't agree with my religious beliefs, fine. I ask that you respect them, however, and don't push your political agenda in my face and tell me with the same act that my religion is wrong. I don't go around pushing my religious beliefs on others, do me the same courtesy.
So, I hate gay people and want to deny them the right to happiness, right? No, quite the opposite. My government, which I believe in (regardless of the politics of the times), is founded on the protection of the right to happiness for all people, and I believe homosexuals are no less deserving of that right. In fact, I believe very strongly in civil unions as a method to extend the same rights to committed homosexual couples that are extended to married couples. They should have visitation rights at hospitals and prisons. They should receive the same tax status as two married individuals. They should be seen legally as one entity, should they wish that, just as with the legal status of a married couple. I would extend all of these rights and priveleges happily to committed gay couples.
So what's the catch? I refuse to call it "marriage." Marriage is a religious term as much as it is a legal term. The legal term is taken from the religious term, which is where the confusion begins. As marriage is a religious term, and the state is separate from religion, the idea of legalizing homosexual marriage is already dealt with in the Constitution, in saying that the government is established to grant and protect rights, not to protect or remove religious institutions. Legal marriage, such as in a marriage certificate is separate from a ceremony in a church. I believe that the rights given by a marriage certificate to hetero couples could be extended to gay couples, just don't call it marriage, because it is not.
The only reason this is a controversial issue at all is because, quite frankly, heterosexual people are sick and tired of gay pride. We don't give a rat's ass what two guys do in the bedroom, to be quite honest, and if you're doing something we consider nasty, we don't want to have it shoved in our faces. We don't want to see gay pride parades, flags, stickers, ribbons, T-shirts, or any other symbol of an act that we think is wrong and honestly, should be kept private. We don't have straight pride parades and T-shirts. We don't have Straight Day at Disney World (but they do have Gay Day), and honestly, we don't want it. Keep it out of our government, because it's a personal choice and doesn't belong there.
Gay people see it differently though. They see these symbols as opportunities to feel like what they are doing doesn't disgust millions of the people around them. They see this as an opportunity to justify their decision and find strength from others who've made the same decision. They think that by making a huge scene, by dressing as women or in BDSM leathers and chains, that they are somehow empowered. They think they are making a statement that regardless of our opinions, we have to accept them, and in doing so cross the line into pushing your personal beliefs onto me, and I draw the line. The thing is, they have groups like the ACLU who thinks that I should be required by law to tolerate their behavior, and these groups try to push their views into law, so the government needs to step in, and say "No, sorry. We respect your views and will hear them, but we will not force the majority of this country to agree with you when they do not."
Gay rights is a simple issue. Are they people? Are they American citizens? Yes? Then they have those rights already established in the Constitution. Any further legislation is a political statement meant to piss off the Christian right, and that has no business in our lawbooks. Establish civil unions to guarantee the rights not already guaranteed and be done with it.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home