[GAC-Dems] A thought on marriage equality

[Tony Spain]

Friends, 

 

This is just something I wrote because I was inspired by some things people
said in a forum. I just thought I would share it will all of you. Agree or
disagree, tell me what you think.

 

Peace,

Tony Spain

 

 

 

 

In the words of Louis Black, "you're telling me, that after 9/11... that's
something your gunna fuckin' worry about? On the list of things we have to
worry about, gay marriage is on page 6 after, 'are we eating too much garlic
as a people?'" Though I find this quote hilarious, and I find homophobia
ridiculous, I think gay marriage IS something we should be worried about. It
is a matter of civil rights. Is the United States really an egalitarian
country founded upon a social contract tradition? On paper, it would appear
that way; however, I beg to differ. We STILL have fundamental civil rights
problems in this county, and the fight for marriage equality is at the
forefront. It a perfect world, we would look to thinkers like Jean-Jacques
Rousseau, John Locke, and Thomas Jefferson. These thinkers all argue for
equality based upon the social contract tradition that this country was
supposedly founded upon (some would argue that this country was founded upon
Christian values... unfortunately for them the forefathers were deists). The
problem surrounding equal rights for homosexuals is much more complex.

 

The problems the Christian right have with marriage equality, though I don't
agree with them, are valid. They live by a document that establishes certain
codes of conduct, and homosexuality is breaches that code. Marriage is a
Judeo-Christian tradition, and thus, allowing homosexuals to participate in
that tradition is wrong in their eyes and in the eyes of the God they
worship. They feel as though the homosexuals are impeding upon their rights
and their religion by demanding that they and their God recognize them as a
legitimate married couple. 

 

At the same time, homosexuals are being denied legal rights allocated by the
government. Because of the traditions, semantics, and religious implications
involved in 'marriage' there is such a huge push against marriage equality. 

 

There is, in my opinion, a way in which this problem may be solved, and it
will make neither party exceptionally happy. This elucidation is the civil
union. Now before the gay activists get their panties in a bunch let me
clarify myself.  I'm not saying "breeders get marriage, gays get 'civil
unions"'. I'm not giving a Plessey v. Fergusson solution to the problem. I
say that everyone, regardless of their sexual orientation, should be awarded
a civil union and NOT a marriage. The civil union offers all couples the
basic traditional marriage rights of joint custody of children, joint
ownership of assets, tax incentives, hospital visitation, and the works.
This way, the government isn't in the business of establishing religious
unions by awarding marriage certificates to those people who qualify under
the prerequisites defined by the Bible. Instead, the government issues
rights equally to all couples, and if any church wishes to declare a union a
marriage in the eyes of their god, then they may do so without the
government crossing the line into the realm of religion. 

 

Actually, I think Louis Black is right. Gay marriage isn't something we need
to be worried about, but marriage equality is. Let the breeders have their
sacred word, but in the eyes of Uncle Sam, your union should be a civil one,
no matter your race, religion, gender, or sexuality.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.gustavus.edu/pipermail/gac-dems/attachments/20060522/ca78cad9/attachment.html