It's not exactly a secret that I happen to be of a... "fabulous kind of persuasion". You can see why this issue is important to me.
Earlier this year Maine's legislature approved a law allowing same-sex marriage. However, a quirk in Maine law allows for the voters to repeal a law if it is voted down in a referendum. Yesterday, the electorate of Maine repealed the same-sex marriage law, 53% to 47%.
OK. It's Maine. I don't live there; I don't know if anyone here does. In my own state, gay marriage has been against the Constitution since 2004. But this really ticks me off. This is the year 2009. Man walked on the Moon 40 years ago. We live in an era when we can access pretty much any kind of information from little boxes that can fit in the palms of our hands. We have video phones. The technology exists for cars fueled by water. Smallpox and polio have been all but erased from the face of the Earth. A black man is the President of the United States. Ladies and gentlemen, this is the future.
Eighty years ago, women couldn't vote. Four generations ago, black people were slaves. We've come incredibly far. Yet, somehow, it is OK for 30 states to have it in their Constitutions that gay people can't get married to whom they choose. The US Government has identified 1,138 rights that straight people have that homosexuals can't have access to unless they get into a sham marriage.
Homosexuals have fewer rights than heterosexuals. How is that OK? How is that acceptable? How can we, as a nation that prides itself on being founded on the principle of "All men are created equal", deny anywhere from 6-12% of the population, the right to marry who they want?
I don't want to hear "You have the exact same rights heterosexuals do. You don't deserve special rights." So let's take sexual orientation out of the picture. There are three imaginary people, Alice, Bob and Carol. Can Alice marry Bob? Yes. Can Carol marry Bob? Yes. Alice and Carol are equal in their right to marry Bob.
Can Bob marry Carol? Yes. Can Alice marry Carol in a ceremony recognized by every state and the Federal government? No. Bob and Alice are unequal in their right to marry Carol. Bob has a right that Carol does not have. Is sexism OK in current society? I shouldn't think so.
And, just to prove another point that may come up, let's throw in Daniel, Elizabeth and Fido. Daniel is a happily married man. Elizabeth is a 10 year old girl. Fido is a dog. Can Alice marry Daniel? No, that is bigamy. Can Bob marry Daniel? No, that is bigamy. Can Carol marry Daniel? No, that is bigamy. Alice, Bob and Carol are equal in their inability to marry Daniel. Can Alice marry Elizabeth? No, Elizabeth is a minor and cannot give consent. Can Bob marry Elizabeth? No, Elizabeth is a minor and cannot give consent. Can Carol marry Elizabeth? No, Elizabeth is a minor and cannot give consent. Alice, Bob, and Carol are equal in their inability to marry Elizabeth. Can Alice marry Fido? No, Fido is a dog and unable to give consent. Can Bob marry Fido? No, Fido is a dog and unable to give consent. Can Carol marry Fido? No, Fido is a dog and unable to give consent. Alice, Bob and Carol are equal in their inability to marry Fido.
Same-sex marriage will not lead to legalized polygamy, legalized pedophilia or legalized bestiality if looked at in this sense. As long as no one can legally marry a married person, a child or a dog, it is equal. Equal is good. All we [homosexuals/bisexuals] want is equality.
And what really ticks me off is why people are voting against equality. "It is against my morals" or "It is against my religion." Here's something to think about: Your [the hypothetical voter against same-sex marriage] morals and/or religion are/is not the basis of law in the United States of America. The Constitution is the basis of law in this country. Here's a little tidbit:
Amendment XIV to the United States Constitution wrote:No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Marriage is not a religious institution in and of itself. Yes, marriages can be performed by officials of faith, and marriage is an important and beautiful ceremony in many religions. But you aren't married unless you file the paperwork with the County. Religion does not govern marriage. I'm rather tired of people telling me I can't get married to the person of my choice because their holy book says "the effeminate shall not inherit the Kingdom of God."
It isn't fair. It simply is not fair. Is it REALLY so bad for gay people to be able to file their taxes jointly, and see each other in the hospital? Will your world really come crashing down if the lesbian couple across the street gets married? If you don't like gay marriages, don't get one.
I'm not addressing this to anyone here. I'm just wondering out loud why such patriotic phrases like "Equal justice under law" or "Liberty and Justice for all" don't apply of you're a homosexual or bisexual. I'm just wondering why it's completely legal for a celebrity to have a 53-hour marriage just for kicks, but two women who have been living together for 60 years and desperately want to be able to be there should the other be on her deathbed don't have that right because of the circumstances of their birth.
Why is it OK that when a group of people is continuously discriminated against by the laws of their state, people like the National Organization for Marriage call it "a victory for traditional marriage"? You know what traditional marriage is? Two unwilling teenagers marrying to get their parents lots of money.
Either reform tax law, medical law, and Social Security law, or reform marriage. Frankly, all I want to be able to do is call someone my husband, live with him, be with him when he is sick, get Social Security when we retire and after he's gone, without it being "separate but equal".
Bitching over. You may return to your lives now.
