This is a difficult subject for me to write about. I have gay friends and at least one of them gets furious when I express my view on it. I don't want to hurt anyone, but I feel strongly about the issue.I am in favor of civil unions for gay couples. I want them to have all the rights that they feel they need, including health care, the right to inherit, the ability to have children and/or adopt, community property, and so on.
I am not, though, in favor of gay marriage. My belief is rooted in tradition and religion, I suppose, even though I am no longer the practicing Catholic I once was. The tradition I'm talking about is simply that marriage has always been between a man and a woman, until recently, and in some places. I believe it's a good thing, and a tradition worth keeping.
My gay friends feel that my belief is discrimination. I am branded a bigot because of it.
I agree with them that my belief is discrimination. However, society must always discriminate. Some kinds of discrimination are valid, and others are not. We say that only certain people are allowed to practice medicine. We determine that only women are allowed in female dressing rooms in the gym. We legislate that only those born in the United States can become President. These are all valid forms of discrimination.
An invalid kind of discrimination is racism. Others are sexism, ageism, or—a company policy of not hiring gays.
In my opinion, though, society has the right to determine what is and what is not marriage. This is a valid discrimination, not akin to slavery. If Canada decides that marriage can also be between same sex couples, then that is their right. Massachusetts can decide if they will recognize gay marriage in their state. The United States can define marriage too.
Since I don't want gays to have fewer rights than straights, and I want them to have good lives, free of suffering, and full of joy—I heartily endorse civil unions.
So, it's all about the name, right—marriage? Yes. It's a weighty word for me, and for my friends.
Now that I am brave enough to submit my opinion, I'd like the same courtesy I extend. I do not demonize those who disagree with me. I ask that I not be demonized either. If someone does demonize me for my opinion, then I believe that they are the bigots.
3 comments:
Although I do not agree with your ultimate conclusion, it is refreshing to see somebody articulate opposition to the right to marry without demonizing gay people in the process.
Based on everything you say about not wanting to deprive gay people of rights enjoyed by other Americans and your endorsement of civil unions, I am left wondering if the "marriage" issue is little more than just semantics for you. After all, given all the benefits that you want associated with civil unions, how is that fundamentally different than marriage? The civil unions solution seems like a case of separate but equal to me, though I wish that our government and the American citizenry would at least do that much.
I am not trying to be argumentative because I appreciate how much respect you show gay people in this entry.
Personally, I would like to see the U.S. government out of the marriage business completely. It should provide civil unions --- and all the rights, responsibilities, obligations, and protections associated with them --- to any two consenting adults, gay or straight, and leave marriage to religious institutions. Let the churches (and other religious bodies) which are supposed to be separate from the state determine their own qualifications for marriage.
Thank you historydetective for your comments. I certainly can respect where you are coming from. My basic points I guess are that: (1) Society has the right to define marriage, as long as (2) The rights of all citizens are protected.
If it's just a word, then why do some people get so upset about it?
The issue is bigger than you and me, though, and will ultimately be decided by society, whether your solution, mine, or some other is chosen.
Your are Nice. And so is your site! Maybe you need some more pictures. Will return in the near future.
»
Post a Comment