Call the Wedding Planner...
Writer Brett Porter brings up some good points against the proposed amendment regarding gay marriage. My favorite is the one he closes on: "If Americans feel the need amend the Constitution to refuse marriage rights to gays, doesn't that mean we¹re currently able to marry?"
How Blue Are You?
January 14 -- ...Do I support allowing gays to marry? Yes. Have I always felt this way? No. Do I sound like Donald Rumsfeld, now that I'm answering my own questions? Most certainly. The strongest argument that right-wingers and anti-gay bigots have is that if they allow two men or two women to enter into a most perfect union that solidifies their relationship, their own marriages would somehow change. Really? How?
I believe the most prevalent marriage statistic right now is that around half of all marriages end in divorce. What about all those folks who said they would stick around until they died? Should they not be allowed to marry? Old religious law says they shouldn't. Old law also says divorce should not be allowed.
What about the Britney Spears of the world? Don¹t their 80-hour marriages somehow demean the sanctity of marriage? Anti-gay folks believe that if the state sanctions gay marriage, it also condones their behavior. Does that mean anytime someone whose views or actions we don't agree with gets married, we condone their behavior as well?
Granting marriage rights to two caring, committed people does not condone their behavior. For those who enjoy such a small government, they certainly like it to control the morality and private bedroom acts of its citizens. ³We want a smaller government... except if it's to expand the military. And restrict minorities. And give corporate handouts. And...² Seriously, I could go on forever. For such absolutists that say who is going to hell and who is going to heaven, they certainly have a whole lot of wiggle room for their own positions.
Look at Canada. They can do it; why can't we? Their gay marriage law even allows churches the right to refuse to perform same-sex marriages. It even grants any wedding minister who doesn't want to marry two men or two women the right to abstain. Simple as that! It allows the inclusion of all Americans in this great rite of passage, but notes the possibility that not all Americans subscribe to the same mindset.
You see, liberals and progressives understand that. They have open minds. Conservatives don't.
A few last things about this whole amending crap: The Constitution should never restrict freedoms, only grant them. If not, blacks would still be in literal shackles and I would be getting my alcohol from the speakeasy down the street. And if Americans feel the need amend the Constitution to refuse marriage rights to gays, doesn't that mean we¹re currently able to marry?
Think about that one.
Read the entire article here --> http://www.outinchicago.com/arts/liberallyspeaking.asp
How Blue Are You?
January 14 -- ...Do I support allowing gays to marry? Yes. Have I always felt this way? No. Do I sound like Donald Rumsfeld, now that I'm answering my own questions? Most certainly. The strongest argument that right-wingers and anti-gay bigots have is that if they allow two men or two women to enter into a most perfect union that solidifies their relationship, their own marriages would somehow change. Really? How?I believe the most prevalent marriage statistic right now is that around half of all marriages end in divorce. What about all those folks who said they would stick around until they died? Should they not be allowed to marry? Old religious law says they shouldn't. Old law also says divorce should not be allowed.
What about the Britney Spears of the world? Don¹t their 80-hour marriages somehow demean the sanctity of marriage? Anti-gay folks believe that if the state sanctions gay marriage, it also condones their behavior. Does that mean anytime someone whose views or actions we don't agree with gets married, we condone their behavior as well?
Granting marriage rights to two caring, committed people does not condone their behavior. For those who enjoy such a small government, they certainly like it to control the morality and private bedroom acts of its citizens. ³We want a smaller government... except if it's to expand the military. And restrict minorities. And give corporate handouts. And...² Seriously, I could go on forever. For such absolutists that say who is going to hell and who is going to heaven, they certainly have a whole lot of wiggle room for their own positions.
Look at Canada. They can do it; why can't we? Their gay marriage law even allows churches the right to refuse to perform same-sex marriages. It even grants any wedding minister who doesn't want to marry two men or two women the right to abstain. Simple as that! It allows the inclusion of all Americans in this great rite of passage, but notes the possibility that not all Americans subscribe to the same mindset.
You see, liberals and progressives understand that. They have open minds. Conservatives don't.
A few last things about this whole amending crap: The Constitution should never restrict freedoms, only grant them. If not, blacks would still be in literal shackles and I would be getting my alcohol from the speakeasy down the street. And if Americans feel the need amend the Constitution to refuse marriage rights to gays, doesn't that mean we¹re currently able to marry?
Think about that one.
Read the entire article here --> http://www.outinchicago.com/arts/liberallyspeaking.asp
posted by Jim at 5:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home