Gay Marriage: Can't We Just Get to the Good Part?

true detective /hannibal / dc movies / snl / mindhole blowers / netflix / celebrity facts / marvel

Gay Marriage: Can't We Just Get to the Good Part?

By Cindy Davis | Think Pieces | March 28, 2013 | Comments ()


When I married my husband oh-so-many years ago, I inherited many new relatives--among them, the Guncles. The Guncles quickly became my favorite people; they were warm and genuine, quick with conversation, wonderful cooks, and great with children. They had both been teachers and business owners and were full of funny stories about classrooms and kids...and sprinkled in once or twice, a sobering anecdote about the discrimination they had lived with most of their lives. My kids have grown up with and adore the Guncles, never thinking that their relationship is any different from any others. In fact, after they quietly married a few years ago in Massachusetts, my youngest daughter only wondered if Uncle C. had worn a dress. The Guncles, both now in their early 70s, were finally able to marry after being together more than fifty years. Having spent their lives knowing they were not viewed as equals in this country, they already had medical and legal powers of attorney to grant them the ability to take care of each other the ways most married people take for granted. I'm not even sure they knew how much the choice to be married meant to them until it was there, in front of them. But, certainly it meant something much more than legal and tax implications, just as it does to any of us who choose to marry. It is incomprehensible that for the majority of our country, that choice still isn't extended to lesbian or gay couples.

You'd think by now, we have this equality thing down. We've done it before; it's like learning first grade math: 2 + 7 = 9, therefore, 7 + 2 also = 9, as does 2 + 4 + 3, 3 + 4 + 2, and so on. They all equal nine. We are black, yellow, red, male, female, transgender, Chinese, Ethiopian, Jew, Christian, Muslim, atheist, straight, bisexual, gay, we are all equal people. It's not a difficult concept; we've been over the lesson many times, and yet still we march on with this ridiculous parade, waiting for those in denial to catch up to the indisputable facts. As we watch and read the news of the Supreme Court deliberating over Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act (clearly discriminatory), how can we not lament our own stupidity? We are the nation who consistently purports ourselves to be defenders of the world. We swoop into countries blathering about our equal opportunity, our democracy and freedom, but we rarely defend our own. We hold ourselves up as a shining example of these things we are supposed to stand for, but we haven't lived up to those ideals. Rather, we rip each other apart over guns and healthcare, and the right to rule our own bodies; we allow our children to go hungry, and to be molested and abused in closets, behind the curtains of liturgies and flowing robes. Even now, there are those among us more concerned about defiling the sanctified definition of a precious word (marriage) than our neighbor having equal rights. Marriage is not defined by race or gender, it is defined by an intimate relationship between two people, and their choice to make a life together. Just as families have evolved over time, so shall marriage. And as has happened in the past, regardless of the current laws or definitions, the discriminated people in this country have already begun their forward march. They're not waiting to create the relationships and families of the future. For the latecomers, their children are explaining the obvious: "Our family is just like yours." They know we must--we will--join them.

It is not an act of courage to stand up for marriage equality now; it is simply common sense. As much as I love our President, more than being proud of him for finally declaring his support last year, I felt: "What took you so long?" (Hillary Clinton, so it goes with you.) The courageous people began their fight back in the 1950s, yet here we still are today, trying convince the misguided holdouts that gay and lesbian people deserve the same rights as the straights. Our continued prejudices have caused our children so much despair that an alarming number of them have killed (or attempted to kill) themselves rather than be persecuted for their differences. That we continue to have to deliberate this issue is a detriment to us all, and the lack of support and immediate action is, once again, teaching the wrong lesson to our children. Why, after every battle for equality this country has been through, after all the acts of courage, violence and bloodshed throughout our history, is it still so difficult for us to see each other as equals?

If I could say anything to those Supreme Court justices going back and forth this week, it would be, "Can't we just skip all this and get to the good part?" Can we just stop mucking around and go directly where we need to be--where we know we're inevitably going? We've been through this before. This is not an issue of states' rights; this is an issue of human rights. We don't allow states to decide interracial or interfaith couples cannot marry, and we cannot allow states to discriminate against gay and lesbian couples. Don't drag this out one moment longer. We are past the point of needing to go through all these machinations to become the country of equal opportunity we claim to be.










Cindy Davis, (Twitter)

5 Shows After Dark 3/28/13 | 5 Shows After Dark 3/28/13

Are you following Pajiba on Facebook or Twitter? Every time you do, Bill Murray crashes a wedding.

Comments Are Welcome, Bigots and Trolls Are Not

  • BlackRabbit

    "It is incomprehensible that for the majority of our country, that choice still isn’t extended to lesbian or gay couples." It really isn't. The Bible says gays are bad and unnatural, therefore they should not be treated as real people. People who believe this have lots of money and influence. Politicians want money and influence. Not that incomprehensible. Not good, but understandable.

    As another commenter said: we want control. We elect people and make laws to keep it. Homosexuality "threatens" that control, the careful view of what the world should be-"the center cannot hold." And so: fear-belief-money-laws. Easy.

  • mvcleave

    We are the country that equates sex with evil, almost as much as the Persian countries with which we're currently at war. I haven't read the Koran, but I know what terrifies the WASP's. There is this fear that if we accept homosexuality we will suffer the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah. To accept gay people is to succumb to a world-wide lascivious gangbang, from which we shall all be turned to pillars of salt. God help us all.

    We may as well make women wear burkas and walk three steps behind our men with that ridiculous logic. If one really wants to proclaim the 'Ides of March,' how about realizing that we are all, 'Merica" and Europe alike, becoming a serfdom rather than worrying about who and how often other people screw.

  • clancys_daddy

    If gay marriage is the biggest problem this country faces then we must have cured cancer, invented a vaccine along with a cure for AIDS , ended illiteracy, war, hunger, poverty, racism, and every person has access to clean water, plentiful food, and healthcare, and I must have just missed the announcement.

  • NynjaSquirrel

    Great piece - very well said.

  • e jerry powell

    But see, once gay marriage becomes the real thing at the federal level, I'm gonna have to go all self-actualized girly on it and marry myself so that I can get lots of presents.

    Also: LOVE those calla lilies; I have them in my garden.

  • Xtacle Steve

    The thing that probably bothers me most is the child argument. It doesn't matter whether a child is raised by one mom; one dad; two moms; two dads; an uncle; a grandma; Gary Busey. As long as that child is loved and cared for by it's parent/s, it will be okay. If anything is out there that makes life harder for a child of a same sex couple, it's the assholes that tease them for it.

  • NateMan

    Well said.

  • It's hard to believe that Macklemore and Ryan Lewis, the guys behind the Thrift Shop song, have also made this truly lovely and thoughtful song in support of marriage equality. Here's the youtube vid if you haven't heard/seen it already.

  • Julieds

    No, it's not hard to believe. It's reached #1 here in Australia, and last week I overheard a discussion in a thrift shop by 3 elderly ladies regarding how much they liked "Same Love".

  • Quorren

    Many of their songs have a social consciousness message. With sick beatz, as poopnado pointed out.

  • poopnado

    Why is that hard to believe? Thrift Shop is an anti-materialism anthem. It just happens to have a sick beat.

  • I guess I didn't express myself well. I wasn't trying to harsh on M & RL. To the contrary, I enjoyed The Heist very much. I was just surprised that a group from the hip-hop genre released such a song. They even talk about how there is a lack of acceptance in that community in Same Love.

  • Guest

    One of my all time favorite gay marriage couples

  • damnitjanet

    Bravo. Also, that 3rd pic from the bottom makes even my hard, hard heart melt.

  • Miss Kate

    Beautifully said.

  • Boo_Radley

    I'm all for gay marriage, but the couple in picture 5 look like twins, and that just ain't right.

  • BWeaves

    Most hetero married couples eventually start looking like each other and dressing alike. It means they've had a fantastic marriage and "We are One" so to speak. If the couples look alike, it's a good thing.

  • NynjaSquirrel

    Of course, this kind of abomination can only lead to one thing:
    (Damnit, it ate my picture)

  • Ash

    I assume it was Homer Simpson making out with himself?

  • Bedewcrock

    I've read you start to mimic the facial expressions of your partner so you work the same muscles and then....... you're that happy couple that looks pretty similar :)

  • NateMan

    ... You mean the black guy and white guy? Yeah, they're practically identical. Disgusting.

    Unless you mean the white girls one more down? Or white guys 2 more down? Yeah... Still don't see it.

  • NateMan

    One other thing: While I want very much for the Court to come down on the right side of this, and while it will hurt a lot of people if they don't, when you look at the long term it's going to happen no matter what. Gay marriage is a reality. Every time people get a good look at married gay people, see them in love, see them raising kids, their homophobia becomes harder to maintain. The hardcore bigots will die. Their children will see the truth. And soon (in historical terms) gay marriage will be seen as just another fact of life.

    That's not to diminish the needs and desires of the people, right now, unable to marry the person they love. Things suck for them, and I want it to get better NOW, not 20yrs down the road. But it will happen, one way or another.

  • On the one hand, I want to agree. On the other hand, just yesterday, I saw an article about a white student union on a college campus patroling to protect their fellow whites from a rash of black crimes. They were even offering escorts to white women walking to class. Every bit of it sounded like an article from decades ago, but it's happening right this minute.

    I'm not saying that attitude isn't a minority, but it's still there. It's young people who got it from somewhere. And yeah, that kind of racist BS lost their fight, which is part of why you can comfortably say that gay rights will win, too.

    But those hardcore bigots have families and they have children, and not all of them are going to see the truth. Some of them are going to pick up where their parents and grandparents left off.

  • poopnado

    I agree in some ways, but I feel like in other ways society is becoming less and less accepting of differences, and I think the internet is contributing to the problem. If I have bigoted values and ideas, I can pick and choose which websites I visit and only interact with people who share my ideals, thus reinforcing them. I have lived in a lot of conservative areas (and some liberal ones too), and I feel like things really aren't moving towards inevitable change. I've met many young people with very hateful attitudes towards people of different race/sexual orientation/you name it. And a lot of older people with accepting attitudes. I don't think it's an age thing. And arguing that we just have to wait for old people to die in order for change to happen might tempt people into not taking action if they think, "Oh, whatever. Change will come". Or, if you're John Mayer, "waiting on the world to change". BLEGH. WHY DID I JUST QUOTE JOHN "MY DICK IS A WHITE SUPREMACIST" MAYER?

    That was a long, rambling paragraph. I'm also not trying to insinuate that conservative values are wrong, or that I'm somehow more open-minded than other people because I believe that gay partners should receive the same rights as hetero partners. People here probably think I am though.

  • Drake

    I agree. But I am DAMN tired of waiting.

  • BWeaves

    I agree, it's a case of when, not if. Eventually the people holding this back will die off.

  • Bert_McGurt

    I'd like to see a comparison of the proportion of gay divorces versus hetero divorces since the former became legal (in various locations). I suspect then we'd see who's truly interested the sancitity of marriage. Besides, if recent trends and reality TV are any indication, a lot of straight couples are more concerned about their wedding than their marriage anyway.

    I read an op-ed article the other day written by a Christian (John Kass at the Chicago Tribune) lamenting the lack of "tolerance" they receive, and talking about how for "centuries, the church has ALLOWED (emphasis mine) the state to license marriages". All while claiming to be "not opposed" to gay marriage - er, "same-sex unions". Concerned about how religious freedom was or wasn't going to be considered in the decision. Afraid of being portrayed as a bigot. Paying lip service to equal rights. Throwing in this little gem of a non-sequitur:

    "It is a world of language and political symbolism, a world where ideas are often framed so that they may lead to inexorable conclusions favoured by the dominant culture. In this media world, I sometimes wonder whether the word "sin" has been outlawed by the high priests of journalism for fear of offending one group or another. And I’d rather not ask."

    Well, you just did, you self-centred a**hole. And at the same time you clearly demonstrate that what you're really concerned about is losing control. About your diminished influence. About how you can't tell people to outlaw the crazy things that you think are icky. That you're going to be called out as a hypocrite for picking and choosing what Biblical passages you think are important. That as long as you consider something "sin", you can't possibly be "not opposed" to it.

    All the while forgetting that this is all the result of you sticking your f*cking noses into things that don't affect you. As our late PM Mr. Trudeau once said: "The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation."

    Neither does the church. This is not a moral issue. It's an issue of power and control, and they're afraid of losing.

  • One of the big hangups that I have in understanding that kind of argument is how someone can't grasp that their freedom to practice their religion ends with their own life. Your religion and beliefs are sacred and you should absolutely have the right to practice them--but your right to practice it shouldn't infringe on my right to practice mine. Gay marriage is no more a threat to anyone's freedom of religion than the synagogue down the street.

    Also, last I heard, the first wave of gay marriages are expected to be very stable--they're mostly marriages between very long-term, very stable couples. Following that, there's expected to be a wave of gay divorces as the newer, more impulsive couples realize they totally *can* get married now, which absolutely means it's time for their big gay wedding! Eventually, the stats between straight divorce and gay divorce are expected to level out to more or less the same.

    Because if you take out the question of who has what genitals, people are people and they all make the same mistakes.

  • JenVegas

    Oh man, Fuck Kass, that guy is an idiot trolling for pageviews in a dying industry.

  • It makes me so sad to open the Trib and see his shitstain of a column where Mike Royko's used to reside.

  • NateMan

    My favorite quote of all time when it comes to religion are the words of Terry Pratchett. I've come back to this time and again. In a conversation between Pastor Oats and Granny Weatherwax:

    (Oats)"There is a very interesting debate raging at the moment on the nature of sin, for example."
    (Granny)"And what do they think? Against it, are they?"
    "It is not as simple as that. It's not a black and white issue. There are so many shades of gray."
    There's no grays, only white that's got grubby. I'm surprised you don't know that. And sin, young man, is when you treat people as things. Including yourself. That's what sin is."
    "It's a lot more complicated than that--"
    "No it ain't. When people say things are a lot more complicated than that, they means they're getting worried that they won't like the truth. People as things, that's where it starts."
    "Oh, I'm sure there are worse crimes-"
    "But they starts with thinking about people as things…"

    Gay people who want to marry one another view their partners as people. People who support them view gay folks as people. People who want to stop them view them as things. As other.

    There is only one group in this argument guilty of sin.

  • MyySharona

    I'm upvoting you for picking a favorite quote by a favorite author in an argument I passionate care about. You made my day.

  • Quorren

    I think Granny Weatherwax could easily run the country better than most of our current politicians.

  • NateMan

    People just need to be honest about why they're against gay marriage:
    Anal sex is icky, and it makes them feel gross to think about 2 dudes doing it. It's not about the children - because if it was more homophobes would adopt kids. It's not about procreation - if it was, they'd have a problem with infertile people getting married. It's all about the nasty gay sex.

    Their opinions won't become any more relevant, but at least they'll be telling the truth.

  • MissAmynae

    But if two girls are with each other doin' it, its hot and jerk-off material. ??!!

    I think the Ick Factor is a huge part of homophobia, but admitting weakness and fear is even more daunting than admitting they don't want a person of the same sex looking at them in a sexual way.

  • Bert_McGurt

    Which is sort of ironic since most gay men (at least the ones I know) would have no interest in any of those pricks. Aesthetic, sexual, or otherwise.

    Not to toot my own horn, but I get hit on by gay men from time to time and frankly? It's pretty flattering. Somebody thinks you're hot and wants to get it on with you - dude, that's a compliment!

  • MissAmynae

    Fuck yeah!! If one of my gay pals says "Girl you look hot as fuck tonight" its much more of a compliment than a frat boy's "dang girl you fine."

  • NateMan

    Lesbians don't enter into it for a lot of them. Have the conversation with a homophobe; talk to them about gay marriage. Almost every single time, women having sex together and getting married is an afterthought. Maybe it's sexism in action, I dunno. But two women together are not perceived as the same threat as 2 men getting married, 2 men raising children together, etc. Or if they are they still aren't getting talked about as much.

    The threat to homophobes is gay men. Always has been.

  • Maguita NYC

    "Almost every single time, women having sex together and getting married is an afterthought."

    Your comment reminds me of the rape debate we had not long ago on Pajiba. It all goes back to interpretation of false manhood and impelled penetration.

    Most men, still to this day, equate or rather mistake expression of love or desire towards their intended with the act of penetration. No matter how liberal, feminist, or forward-thinking they might be, most men still believe that penetration is the way to marking their intended as their chosen one (be it for a night, or a lifetime).

    And through the ages, how did men take possession, whether it be of a territory, a woman, or a man? Through penetration. The same way we women are raised with the fear of rape, boys are raised with the freedom to possess. Yes, it's stripped down to basic animal instinct, but it is nonetheless quite prevalent and rooted.

    And what does a man fear most? Being possessed.

    If you actually dig deep and keep on questioning and challenging those with even a hint of homophobia, you would realize that what men fear most for themselves and those they cherish, be it sons or daughters, is weirdly the act of penetration. Not many are able to admit to it. For one, they perceive it as submitting or being taken, and two, most obviously mistake gay sex for penetration (which makes less than 50% of sexual relationships between men). Boys are often raised with clemency towards their "manly" desires, they feel uncomfortable with suddenly becoming the "hunted quarry".

    Women have lived with this feeling for centuries, and have had to deal with many a situation of unwanted advances. But we have dealt with it. And so shall they.

    In my opinion, this will open a whole new debate on unacceptable behavior in civilized society, where the burden of being a quarry should be lifted, and would no more be condoned for neither genders.

  • MissAmynae

    Entirely agree. Honey I live in Texas, I'm surrounded by voracious homo-haters on one side, and my glorious gay friends on the other. "Fags" and "Fairies" are abominations, but "dykes" aren't as bad. wtf??!!

    2 women is okay, because they aren't seen as preventing reproduction by being together ("wasting" sperm), and the idea of two mothers is more attractive than 2 fathers. Just like the courts being biased towards the mother in custody cases. It makes no sense, and just clouds the arguments for marriage equality.

  • NynjaSquirrel

    But - it would only take one drunken moment, one slip of the imagination to visualise their best friend jacking them off as a teenager - simply to gain the relief they so desperately craved. It's a very big step to see themselves as a woman.
    That's where the difference lies - they're damn close to being a fag, but a long way from being a dyke.

  • MissAmynae

    Exactly. And if they're a bottom, they relinquish the inherent power of the penis. A "fag" will lick your balls, and **gasp** you'll like it. A "dyke" will just kick your ass then fix your leaky sink.

    What the fuck ever, homophobes. Just stop being assholes and let people love who they want to love.

  • Sara_Tonin00

    Except most guys don't think anal sex is icky. They think two men kissing is icky, maybe, or maybe being on the *receiving* end of anal sex is icky, but many of them would be pretty damned please to tap some anus.

    I don't think it gets boiled down to one facet - for some people (however misguided) it is a moral/salvation issue.

  • NateMan

    Nope, sorry. I admit I was a bit facetious about the anal comment, many dudes have no problem with the idea of it going in a woman's butt. Any maybe, maybe for a astonishingly small percentage of homophobes it's a genuine moral issue. The ones who don't mix fabrics, don't eat meat when it isn't allowed, don't get tattoos, and think mouthy kids should be stoned to death.

    But I've yet to meet one who can make a coherent moral argument about it. Particularly among those who say "Well, I don't care what gay people do in the privacy of their own homes, but marriage is a sacrament." It seems to me that if you believe one line in the Bible, you must believe all of it, at least all of it in the same section. And they don't. They pick and they choose, and so their small-minded morality means nothing.

    I'm standing by my previous statement: for the vast majority of people against gay marriage, it comes down to the Ick Factor.

  • Sara_Tonin00

    Don't equate morality with biblical literalism. And don't equate considering homosexuality immoral with homophobia, which I'm defining as a fear of gays.

    Look, I don't agree with it. But most people consider sexual behavior to be a moral issue. And it's certainly possible that many of the people who consider it immoral haven't given the matter much personal reflection, and are towing a religious/party line. And it doesn't necessarily need to make sense, or appear rational to you, for that to be true.

    But there are many, many things which a majority of people consider icky but are not illegal. Tattoos and piercings jump to mind, but that's just my first thought.

  • NateMan

    I'd love to hear a 'moral' objection to gay marriage that doesn't boil down to either religious fanaticism or distaste of gay sex. Apart from the 'think of the children' types who do their best to cloud the issue with false and obfuscating research typically funded by NOM and their mouthbreathing ilk, I can't think of any. And that boils down to the same thing.

    I think you're giving people far too much credit. You think they have rational (to them) reasons for the way they feel. I don't. You think people can have a moral objection to homosexuality that's not based in homophobia. I don't. Having a 'moral' objection to something boils down to fear. Fear of danger or the unknown. Sometimes it makes sense; we have a moral objection to murder because it harms both the individual and society. And sometimes it doesn't. If someone is so afraid of someone else's sexuality that they're willing to use the law to stop them from marrying the person they love, keep them out of the Armed Forces, stop them from adopting children, and deny them the basic protection of the laws afforded to heterosexuals, that fearful person is a bigot and a homophobe. I refuse to coddle them any more. If they can't nut up and admit exactly what they are at least to themselves, they're not only homophobes but cowards.

  • Sara_Tonin00

    First let me say, in case you haven't guessed it, I'm kind of a compulsive devil's advocate. When someone feels differently from me - as is the case for those opposed to gay marriage - I do try to understand that perspective, and I don't like facile dismissals of it - I think they weaken the strong case for it.

    I know religious people who are not fanatics, and believe gay marriage (and sex) is wrong. I know other religious people who are not fanatics, and who struggle with the notion. There are people who think unrepentant homosexual behavior damns you to hell, and is therefore self-destructive behavior. And much as people intervene when they see friends drunk-driving or shooting up, these people want to intervene in behavior they think more perilous, because the damage is eternal. And they don't want to see that behavior publicly sanctioned, because a society where it's more prevalent encourages more people to participate.

    Now, admittedly, that is not the high-minded position of many opposed to gay marriage. And it's not my personal view - my personal view is, wherever/whenever possible, choose love.

    I didn't say I find the moral argument rational - I actually said the opposite - that it doesn't have to appear rational. And I disagree with the notion that morality is born strictly of fear; I think there is more to "good" and "evil" than what is fearful.

    I try to take apart and examine the opposition to gay marriage, because my own knee-jerk distaste is against polygamous marriage. And why should I have that, if what other people do in their beds and their houses is not my business? I think it stems from the fact that polygamous marriage tends to occur in places where women are minimized. But if that's removed - if it's something that only occurs among truly consenting adults - what is the legal. civil or moral opposition? My gut still tells me it's "wrong" for society, but what does that actually mean?

  • I'm actually glad to know there are other compulsive devil's advocates out there. That's gotten me in more trouble and inconvenienced me a great deal more than I'd like to admit. But I just can't stop it.

    That's why I actually spent some real time researching white supremacy. I wanted to understand, even if I'd never agree (incidentally, a little while reading about that and you'll need ALL the showers).

    I struggle really hard to understand opposition to gay marriage and gay rights, and maybe I have more trouble understanding because, as a lesbian dating a transwoman, it hits very close to home for me. Years ago, my state enacted a constitutional ban on gay marriage, and yet just last year, a gentleman walked into my place of work and screamed at our receptists (actual, literal screaming, I could hear him all of the way in the back) about how we're letting the gays take over, and how can we stand aside and let that happen? He was passionately, deeply, personally angry and scared. We've got a politician who announced in the middle of a meeting (apparently apropos of nothing, because it was a meeting in a school without a single thing to do about sexuality) that gays are a bigger threat to America than terrorism. My aunt, who knows far less about me than she thinks, informed me that gays can't marry because of the children (her exact words, too).

    I'm kind of stunned by the amount of fear and passion and anger involved in the whole thing, in the wanting to deny me rights and in wanting to funadmentally change who I am 'for my own good.' I think understanding would help bridge the gap and maybe help create some dialog that isn't just two sides having completely diffferent conversations in the direction of each other.

    Of course, it would be nice if both sides would devote some time to understanding each other. As near as I can tell, the 'gays are worse than terrorists' politician hasn't made a lot of effort to understand homosexuality outside of looking online for the most revolting and extreme gay porn she could find to prove how depraved and horrible the gay really is.

  • That last bit isn't to say that some of the dismissive and belittling talk and behavior towards the religions and beliefs of others hasn't gone just as twisted and unhelpful as getting grossed out by gay porn and claiming that's all you need to know about gay to know it's wrong. There's a lot going wrong in the communication and understanding from both sides.

  • Sara_Tonin00

    True that. It's why I try to look at things cooly - too cooly, sometimes - but it takes all kinds. Those who get angry, those who are outraged, those who are calm, those who are optimistic.

    As for the laws "for my own good" - well, it's a messy line. It just won't ever be clean. It's why we freak out about anti-smoking laws or soda restrictions (I'm shocked so much by the "i'll have to pay for your healthcare down the line, so you're not allowed to abuse your body" argument) - it's sometimes difficult to figure out what rules are actually suggested for the benefit of society, and what are micromanaging.

  • When I mentioned changing me for my own good, I wasn't talking so much about laws as about the people who think that being gay is a choice and that I should just make a different choice. Or the kinds of organizations running degayification programs.

    These are often the kinds of people who tell me that I totally have the right to get married if I want to, provided it's to a man, which is why gays want special rights instead of equal rights.

    I personally believe that all laws should be boiled down to the basic functioning of society or rights, and if you can't reduce a law down to that level, it's got to go. Obviously, this is how things will work in the future when we all ride unicorns to work.

  • NynjaSquirrel

    I'd love to see the religious literalists follow EVERY line and command in the bible, stoned to death for eating shellfish... go on, start now, let's see how far you get.

  • Sara_Tonin00

    pretty much just check out a Hasid community. Or read "The Year of Living Biblically"

  • Ted Zancha

    YES! I love this. Lets just make it happen and be done with it. I think its wonderful that more an more people are supporting this cause and continue to fight for equal right.

    A nice story to lift the spirits, if you will:

    I teach in a small town in southern Arizona. It is a super conservative military town with old people packing heat, some racial tension, and a bit of a divided community... and yet the LGBT community is accepted (for the most part). We have the PFLAG group that is full of parents supporting kids and the community. I sponsor the Gay Straight Alliance at the high school and the kids are widely accepted. And a year ago, the town had it's first Pride March that included students and people from the community. As we walked, people actually joined us/ honked and waved in support (well there was one asshole that flipped us off, but he was the only one). It's just nice to see that, despite a lot of people not recognizing this as a equal right issue, a small conservative town can support the LGBT community.

  • DarthCorleone

    Right on!

  • Christopher

    I was brought up in a Christian household, with Christian parents, siblings, and friends. Even today they wrinkle their noses in disgust when the subject of gay marriage is broached. It makes my ears burn.

    I just don't get why anyone would vote in favour of something simply to make someone else's life harder; it has absolutely no bearing on your own existence, save maybe that icky feeling you get when you see two guys holding hands.

    Back in election time, I heard one guy's dad preferred most of Obama's policies, but was voting for Romney simply because of his LGBT stance. I just- fucking- UUURGH

  • NateMan

    That sucks. My parents are pretty liberal, thankfully, and don't have a lot of prejudices. But at one point I remember saying to my young daughter that she was going to make someone a very lucky man or woman. And my mother made a little disgusted noise and a comment along the lines of that no, it wouldn't be fine if my girl ended up gay. I told her in no uncertain terms that it WOULD be fine, and that my child was perfectly welcome to fall in love with whoever she wanted, provided she was treated right in that relationship.

    I don't care who my kid comes home with, as long as they make her happy.

  • Bert_McGurt

    In other words, happiness need not include an actual penis?

  • NateMan

    Eh, I do love my penis. It's a big part of my happiness (well, an acceptably-sized part anyway). But I understand it's not for everyone.

  • Christopher

    Rock on, sir!

  • seannyd

    I think about this a lot actually. That there was a point in history where it was totally okay to own another human being in this country. When it was okay to deny women the right to vote. When it was okay to make people who look different use a separate bathroom. It's literally absurd and I have difficulty wrapping my mind around it. And yet, a significant portion of our population was totally okay with all of this. Now, most people recognize it as the absurdity as it is. I imagine history is on the side of eventual common sense. So yes, I wish we could just skip to the good part. But the only way to do that is to drown out the voices of those against it and beat them over the head with common sense. Over and over and over again. Sure, there are those who will never waiver, but I'm sure abolitionists felt the same way back in the mid-1800's.

  • chanohack

    I like what Hillary Clinton said about this: that laws have a teaching effect. Not everyone was on board with abolishing slavery or giving women the right to vote or getting rid of "separate but equal." The laws changed anyway, and people's minds changed faster because of it. We don't have to wait for everybody to get it.

    She also said that some American Christians used to think that owning another human being was a God-given right, and that abolishing slavery was anti-Biblical. But very few people today would try to use the Bible to support slavery, and those who do are discredited. It will get better. The good part will get here.

  • I think it would help to draw the distinction between marriage and Holy Matrimony. Perhaps if we explained that no one is trying to change the latter (really, don't need religion involved at all), folks would get less freaked out about what is, essentially, a contract to engage in a committed (usually monogamous) relationship, ostensibly for the remainder of the contracting parties' lives. Why on earth would anyone care whether other people were entering into such contracts? It does not and has never made sense to me.

  • Maguita NYC

    Because no one has had the guts to publicly and firmly remind those people that we do not live in a theocracy. And that equality to all means exactly this.

    I unfortunately study with a bigot-racist-xenophobic-homophobic twit, and have to on a weekly basis, remind him of how his disturbingly demeaning comments would be much more tolerated even accepted in other countries than ours.

    He then of course goes back to his freedom of speech, to which I have to remind him, that the minute he opts to exercise his right to Free Speech, it becomes public property: To be dissected, quartered, sundered, disjointed, lobotomized and ridiculed if the public feels like it.

    Expecting everybody else to shut-up and submit to only his right to free speech is nothing but imbecilic Acute Mental Laziness. It's quite tiresome at the end, for it makes an endless mute debate that has no basis in our own Constitution.

  • kirbyjay

    Why oh why oh why oh why do these people squawk about their "rights" , free speech, gun ownership etc....when they so blithely ignore other people's?

  • True_Blue

    Re the bigot-racist-xenophobic-homophobic twit--please tell me you guys are in middle school together, and not say college or grad school.

  • emmelemm

    Well, many of us have explained that very thing over and over and OVER again and the "Holy Matrimony" people don't seem to be listening.

  • NynjaSquirrel

    The US really needs to come out of the closet and admit that religion plays waaaay too big a part in everything you decide to do. Holy means squat. There's no god, no holy guide book of do's and don'ts, just mindless drones following the ramblings of someone with an imagination the same way they did in the days when people sat around camp fires at night eating goat.

  • I volunteer to be the person who verbally abuses people who make states' rights arguments. No one really believes in states' rights. They just grasp for it when it suits them and they don't have any other good arguments. But when it happens it's really dumb. So it needs to be done away with swiftly.

  • Maguita NYC

    This, the express picking and choosing of the written word of an elected deity to suit one's purpose.

    Whichever theology you might believe in, its tendered book you read and supposedly are faithful to (books that have lost their meaning in translation through the ages and have very little to do with the original message), does not give you the right to pick, choose, and misquote to gain disingenuous purposes.

    It proves nothing of your faith, but everything that has to do with misogyny, xenophobia, gay prejudice and all-around bigotry.

    Supporting gay couples has nothing to do with what men in robes have taught. We live in a Free Country. We should stop braying what those “father figures” in black dresses have shoved down our throats for centuries, while more than misbehaving themselves.

    And how about the indoctrination through movies that insidiously and maliciously taught us that the gay man is violent, suicidal and a rapist. A man to be shunned by society, a pariah, an abnormality: We allowed a system of hateful theocratic and malevolent "leaders" creed our nurturing years with propaganda and false dogma.

    No one is superior. No one is inferior. True, some have proven to be superior assholes. But know this, no matter your gender, no matter the color of your skin, hair, eyes, sexual orientation, height, size of your feet, hands... If you are born this way, you have every right to stand in this country on absolute EQUAL FOOTING as everybody else. With absolute EQUAL RIGHTS as everyone else. Don't let anyone shame you into anything less.

    Great post Cindy, I have Guncles too, and hate the fact that they cannot act like any other couple publicly. Let's hope DOMA and Prop 8 become nothing but a shameful memory!

  • Tinkerville

    Dammit, Cindy. My makeup was perfect for once and now I look like a raccoon.

  • simplysarah

    You and me both.

blog comments powered by Disqus