pop-culture for the people

Well, somebody had to do it.  I’ve decided to take on gay marriage; maybe I can inspire as much ire as “Here Comes the Pain Again.”

Here’s my basic position: who the hell cares who marries who?  I don’t want somebody telling me who I can marry, whether I can marry, whether I can have kids, how many kids I can have and what religion I must abide by, or that I must abide by a religion at all.  And because I don’t want anyone telling me what I must do with my life, I will not tell anyone what they must do with theirs.  I want my government out of my uterus, off my body and out of my bedroom!

Anti-gay rights individuals will say that gay marriage is the “death” of marriage as we know it.  I’ve heard oh-so-educated numb-nuts on various radio shows say that gay marriage invalidates their marriage with their wives.  If your marriage is that easily invalidated, or requires a piece of paper to make you feel secure in it, then your problems cannot be solved by preventing gays from marrying.

I would say divorce (at the going 50% rate) is a much bigger threat to marriage than gays are.  Are we going to outlaw divorce? No.  Why?  Well, that’s an absurd question, right?  Why is it absurd?  Because the government would be invading heterosexual (read: sanctioned) choices, and we can’t have that.

They say that marriage is designed to protect the family unit and further the species.  If that’s so, than why are infertile couples allowed to stay married?  Why are people who never intend to have children allowed to get married?  Why aren’t people who have kids out-of-wedlock forced to get married?  Why aren’t people who have kids forbidden from getting divorced?  Because it is against their basic civil rights.  Frankly, I think humans are doing ok as a species; we really don’t need the government to step in.

Some people say that we shouldn’t extend special rights to a small group.  Special rights? 90% of the population is allowed to choose (or not choose) marriage at will.  The government is denying rights to a minority; otherwise known as discrimination.  Here’s an example people may find easier to relate to.  I have been in a monogamous heterosexual relationship for 6 ½ years; we are not married.  If I were to get into a serious accident tomorrow, my significant other would have no right to visit me in the ICU.  In fact, it would be up to the discretion of the hospital to allow him to see me or not.  Say our dog was a child; because all of his records are in my name (i.e. he’s legally my child only) my significant other would have no right to keep him should I die.  It would be up to my next of kin to decide where the dog ends up.  Say I owned a house, even if my significant other had been paying half the mortgage for 6 years, my next of kin would have rights to it.  Of course, we can remedy this.  We can go to Vegas tomorrow and get a piece of paper that says he has all the rights to our shared stuff that he previously lacked.  In fact, if we shared a lease for 6 or 7 years the state would just go ahead and confer legal married status on us.  Homosexual couples have no ability to remedy the unfair situation they find themselves in.  If they have a shared child, the non-biological partner may try to legally adopt, but that is usually up to the discretion of a judge.  Even in the case where a will has been made, the family of the deceased can contest it and take away the children, houses, shared property; anything the living partner did not have “legal” right to.  In cases where a couple has had a child and then split up, the non-biological partner often has no rights to the child, even if he or she has been co-raising the child for years.  Gay marriage (and divorce) would actually ensure that families stay together, at least in the sense that parents would have the right to see their children.

So, why marriage, why not just a civil union?  Well, if it does not have all the benefits of marriage, it’s discrimination.  If it does have all the benefits of marriage, it is marriage and you might as well call it that.  We already know that there is no such thing as equal but separate.  The civil rights wars of the 50’s and 60’s taught us that well, and now at the 50th anniversary of Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka it is important to recognize that civil rights issues have not gone away.  The rampant racism of just 40 years ago has not disappeared, it has simply found a new outlet.

You know, as a side note, I think it is awfully funny that members of the GOP, which for years have been known as the party that wants the government out of our lives, is so willing to add to the Constitution to further regulate our lives.  It’s also amusing to me that “activist” judges are such a problem now that they aren’t doing what the GOP wants, but back in 2000 during Bush v. Gore they were doing their duty by appointing a president.  An amendment to the constitution to define marriage?  Are you kidding me? Some people have even suggested that without the marriage amendment, there is nothing to stop groups of people or corporations from going out and getting marriage licenses and all the benefits that they bestow.  Maybe I’ll go out and marry my dog; he’s a male, so it should be perfectly fine.  The amendment doesn’t specify species, only gender.

Ok, that’s it, have at me now.  Here are some links to keep the masses amused:
Dozens of Gays Wed Legally in Massachusetts

One person’s rebuttal of all the anti-gay marriage arguments

This guy describes homosexual relationships as “parasitic”

American Family Association
Great article about how the AFA got their comeuppance in an online poll

Agape Press: “Reliable News from a Christian Source”

Family Research Council

And no discussion on gay rights would be complete without the Christian Coalition of America who incidentally are still protesting women in the military.

—hathyr