Gay Marriage
By Tom Pedersen, 18th Sep 2010 | Follow this author
| RSS Feed | Short URL http://nut.bz/z3j.s480/
Posted in WikinutNewsPolitics
A case for the legalization of same sex marriage in the US.
Defining Marriage
The potential legalization of same sex marriage is a social hot point right now for American culture, and one can wade into any numerous perspectives on both sides of the issue. There is, however, a right answer. Gay Marriage is absolutely legal and justified and the sooner it is adopted in as many States as possible the better.
At the core of the issue is the definition of marriage. Some call it the monogamous, legal union between a man and a woman. I call it the monogamous, legal union between two people, any two people. To limit the definition of marriage to those of the opposite sex is discriminatory.
Beastiality, Pologamy? Come on.
Some claim that to “open up” the institution of matrimony to gays and lesbians is to run the risk of condoning any manner of things from bestiality to polygamy to rewriting the age of consent. Such matters have their own moral consequence and are merely thrown into the gay marriage conversation to misinform and add some steps to the hysterical morality soap-box. The definition of marriage obviously assumes legal age of consent, even if the word “gay” is in the vicinity. For those worried about bestiality, I know that animals have never given their consent to be sexual partners with any member our species, straight or otherwise. And the last I checked, monogamous union between TWO people is by definition, not polygamous.
The Baby Gate?
Another argument is the view that marriage should be reserved for those of the opposite sex because the purpose of marriage is to produce offspring. By that definition, all those who cannot have children, be it low sperm count, menopause or what have you, should be denied access to marriage. See how silly that is? People who can’t have children get married all the time. It’s absurd for them not to.
Marriage vs Civil Union?
Perhaps the most insidious argument revolves around the fact that gays and lesbians can form “civil unions” which carry all the same or similar legal rights as marriage, depending upon which state you’re in. Why push for the word “marriage” when a legitimate term for a homosexual union already exists?
Consider the racial segregation fight in the Southern States in the sixties. Back then, Blacks and Whites could ride the same bus, Whites up at the front, Blacks at the back. The bus took both groups to the same place, and the seats were more or less the same no matter where you sat, but that’s not the point. To tell someone they can sit “here” but not “there” based on the color of their skin is discrimination, just ask Rosa Parks, and it is the same discrimination as telling someone they can call their monogamous union “this” instead of “that” based on their sexuality.
Please don’t dismiss the argument of “gay marriage” vs. “gay civil union” as mere semantics: it speaks to the fundamentals of liberty and equality. A misstep here will be a complete disembowelment of such founding principles. Gays and straights are different from each other, AND they are also equal. We can be different and equal at the same time. And, all things being equal, we can all get married and call it marriage if we want to. And if a particular church refuses to marry homosexuals, that’s their insular right as a congregation of beliefs. But they don’t reserve some special privileged access to the concept of marriage beyond their own following. Do not segregate based on sexuality.
Comments
18th Sep 2010 (#)
I notice that nowhere in your article do you mention the Christian aspect of this issue, other than "And if a particular church refuses to marry homosexuals, that’s their insular right as a congregation of beliefs. But they don’t reserve some special privileged access to the concept of marriage beyond their own following." First of all, just so we are clear, the term marriage is ordained my God and the bible, so if you are going to assert one of Gods law in an effort to sanctify a union, you might want to know what he thinks about it. It is one thing to live a life that is contrary to what God approves of, it is quite another to suggest that God, the church and the rest of society MUST accept it. Lets take a look at what God has to say on the subject shall we. Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable. (Leviticus 18:22), Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. (Romans 1:26-27), Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders. (1Corinthians 6:9). Satan uses our weaknesses to get the better of each and everyone of us, so to does he use individuals who are confused about their sexuality. How we choose to live our lives, that is what we shall be accountable for on judgment day. Now right about now you are probably saying that you don't believe in th bible, funny how that is. You believe in th sanctity of marriage, but you don't believe that God condemns homosexuality. If the gay community insist that they are going to live a non-believer lifestyle, then they should be using the law of man, not of God, because as I have shown you here, God does not approve of that lifestyle, he never did and he never will, regardless of what title you place on it.
Reply to this comment
19th Sep 2010 (#)
As I said, you are entitled to your insular beliefs. Gay people can't get married in your church. Got it. That doesn't mean they can't get married outside of it though.
Reply to this comment
30th Sep 2010 (#)
PLEASE DO read my poem on SEXUALITY
its been the norm throughout life /existence
to ease sexually
the way one wanted it
so be it
God save the self styled Gods POLITICIANS
Reply to this comment
30th Sep 2010 (#)
BUT WHY MARRY
WHATS THE NEED OF A MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE
IN SAME SEX MGS?
they can't reproduce and they can each WILL THEIR WEALTH IF THATS IT
Reply to this comment
30th Sep 2010 (#)
Did you read the article?
Reply to this comment
24th Oct 2010 (#)
@loverme. The certificate is the government's approval of marriage. Real marriage is two people, gay or hetro, committing themselves to one another. I have noticed that Christians appear to be a tad confused about this fact. They love quoting the bible including the old testament when it suits them but ignore the bits they don't like. It is also very clear to atheists like myself that we also know more about the Bible than Christians do.
Reply to this comment