Tuesday, February 17, 2009

For Susan, cus Facebook kinda sucks

Gay marriage. Ooo, aah. Given that speech, where it was given, and the arguments he used, you would think gay marriage wouldn't be an issue anymore. Or least not an issue we have a hard time dealing with. But...

And all I did was google Michael Savage and gay marriage, then BOOM, the mind-bending, cringe-inducing ranting begins. Ah, you just have to love civil, honest debate.

So, I don't like to bring up gay marriage too much, simply because there are bigger things I care about, and I don't want to be seen as the liberal gay man screaming for marriage either. Good thing I have my friends to help me remember working for a good cause is a good thing, no matter what people might think. The right thing to do is always the right thing to do, no matter who you are. But that doesn't mean I will play the same role. I am a gay man, so I am going to have to keep that in mind when talking about gay marriage, but that is more of an asset than a liability.

So, this all came up when Susan wrote her note on Facebook. So today (when I'm home with a very upset stomach and not at work) I was working on a reply, but it seems there is a limited number of words I could use. So, I decided to just make a whole post out of it. So, thank you Susan for giving me a little poke to write, even if you didn't know we were doing it. :-)
"I know there are differences on same-sex marriage, but surely we can agree that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters deserve to visit the person they love in the hospital and to live lives free of discrimination."
- Barack Obama, Aug. 28, 2008.
The optimist in me wants to believe that they aren't against love. Yet the pragmatist in me knows that they don't see it as love, so it's easy for people like them to be against gay marriage and so much more. But the pragmatist in me also knows most of the people against gay marriage don't think like that, and they are worried about the word "marriage" and because of that, what the institution of marriage means. And while the history of marriage is rooted in so many different things, it's hard to separate religion and state when it comes to marriage.

So what we need to do is take the State out of marriage altogether. Let the state issue "civil unions" with full legal equality and say "Civil unions are for consenting adults, who are not blood-related, to form a legally-recognized union, share their lives together, and to be granted all the legal rights inherent in such a legally-recognized union."

People could then go to any church they wish to get "married" and if the church doesn't want to marry them, great; that's their right! And people can chose to also not get "married" but live together in a legally-recognized union. They keep "marriage" and everyone gets equal rights. Win win, so I think we all need to stand up. From a Conservative view, taking the government out of the "marriage" business and letting the people keep those tax cuts and tax breaks they love and only given to "married" couples as the Federal Government defines it. We need to take them on from their right. We have fought the equal rights fight, but going at them from the left isn't going to work. At least not in a way that could take bigger steps towards letting government and organized religion coexist peacefully while the people keep ALL of their rights.

“Any change, even a change for the better, is always accompanied by drawbacks and discomforts.”
- Arnold Bennett

And while we think our fight is hard, we should look to history. We shall overcome, because their fight was longer, bloodier, and more painful, but they did overcome.

No comments:

Post a Comment