Header Ads

A Thing Called Love

After reading the  “One Man, One Woman” at The Ultimate Reality, I felt compelled to explore how homosexuality will “destroy marriage” (and maybe the world?) from a different perspective. Although I strongly believe that everyone is entitled to their opinion, the views presented in the piece were based on factual errors.

Let’s start with the “one man, one woman” idea. Who says that marriage is between one man and one woman? The Bible? The Bible actually says nothing about same-sex marriage. Go ahead, read from Genesis to the end of Revelation, same-sex marriage is never mentioned.

The Bible does say that homosexuality (in different verbiage) is a sin. Of course, the Bible also says the punishment for adultery is death by stoning for both the man and the woman. If we are really going to live by the Bible, we shouldn’t do so selectively. Let’s murder, rape and pillage.

The next argument is that same-sex couples provide poor environments to raise children. That’s a remarkable one, in light of who society does allow to marry - murderers, convicted felons and child molesters. All of these people are allowed to marry and procreate with hardly a second thought, much less a protest, by the same critics. If children are truly the priority, why is this allowed?

Ah, now on to the immorality of homosexuality. For a society that praises how our vast freedoms and rights are unparalleled in the world, and even sends troops across the globe to fight for those freedoms, we are immensely hypocritical here at home. Who or what determines what is immoral? The same country that imprisoned Japanese-Americans in the 40s because of their nationality?

Secular government has no role in our society to decide the basis of morality. Individuals can do that individually.

The suggestion that gay couples can contract for the same rights as married persons is absolutely false. The right to file a joint income tax return, recover damages for the wrongful death of your spouse and custody and visitation of children of the relationship cannot be afforded by a contract. Saying that same-sex couples can “achieve [the] same rights” as heterosexual couples through the legal documents that were mentioned in the article is ridiculous. The idea that it is not discrimination if a same-sex couple has to spend thousands of dollars in attorney fees to create the mentioned legal documents while heterosexual couples spend about $75 for a marriage certificate. Is that just the cost of being gay?

The contention that discrimination of homosexuals is “not relevant” because gays and lesbians are not a class entitled to the protection of the Constitution is a flat-out lie. In Romer v. Evans, a 6-3 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1995, the Court ruled that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is, in fact, a violation of the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Gee golly, it turns out gays are people too.
Personally, it is my belief that the controversy over same-sex marriage has nothing to do with the ideas posed above. Some people are just non-progressive.

It seems highly comical to me that we pride ourselves as being free and the best country in the world, but have let England, Canada and even South Africa surpass our freedoms by allowing same-sex marriage.
Of course, there will always be defenders of the idea to ban gay marriage, just like there are still active Klan members. I just hope some people are above that.

No comments