rss
email
twitter

30 October 2006

Should Homosexuals be Allowed to Marry?


Here's a copy of my response to the Washington Post blog question, "Should homosexuals be allowed to marry?"

Should homosexuals be allowed to marry? Actually, the word Allowed implies a power issue that should not be there in the first place. Who are the we that allow or forbid another group of people from marrying? Are we the majority? Does our power to allow or forbid come from the fact there are simply more of us out there?


And even if the power to allow comes from numerical superiority, isn't it our greatest task as a Democracy to maintain the rights of minorities, as Tocqueville maintained nearly 200 years ago, warning us to avoid a dictatorship of the majority?


The only question is, then, what exactly is the threat? The children, of course.


However, the same people that avoid one scientific proof after another for global warming will wave in your face a study by a social scientist claiming a child needs a mom and a dad.


The same people that cry over the number of unwanted, out-of-wedlock babies will tell you that a baby raised by a married gay couple, which clearly worked harder than heterosexual couples to have that baby, will be neglected and mentally abused.


They will tell you the child will have a better chance of growing up gay. Well, even if we take that into consideration, there is only one remaining question in this debate: Is growing up gay a bad thing? They will tell you that Yes, the life of a gay person is difficult, mainly because he or she will not have the same rights heterosexual people have.


And here the paradox is complete. By taking away the rights of homosexuals we give reason to this denial of rights. The majority in Europe denied Jews land ownership and then complained when Jews turned to money lending. The majority denied African slaves an education and then treated them like animals with no learning capacity. Similarly, the majority now wants to deny homosexuals the right to marry in order to protect children from growing up as an underclass. The solution seems very simple. Now can we concentrate on getting out of Iraq?

13 comments:

Jae said...

What a well written, well spelt out argument.

Jenn of the Jungle said...

Actually, it may be well written, but not well thought out.

Marriage is a religeous right. Not a right, right.

I think 99% of those who argue against it, would cease arguing about it in about 30 seconds if you changed the vernacular to "civil union".

Ricardo said...

My lovely Jenn, I think people would still be up in arms even if the term civil union was used. I think society still feels threatened by any openly gay relationship. It think it's a similar hurdle we had when interracial marriage was on the got seat years ago.

Now if you slap me, don't hit me in the face. You know my rules.

Ricardo said...

oops, that's hot seat.

People in the Sun said...

Thanks for the comments.

Now Jenn, the way I see it, one of two things will happen in the near future:

Either marriage becomes a legal right for everyone or it becomes merely a religious, exclusive rite of passage like baptism or a bar-mitzva. A separation of Church and State would keep marriage an exclusive, religious activity, but it also means marriage will be stripped of its legal significance. A 13 years-old Jewish boy can say, "Today I am a man," but you don't see the Federal Government mailing him a voting application.

I don't think Jenn and other marriage-is-a-religious-right advocates will be happy when marriage is stripped of its legal implications, which leaves only one alternative: marriage must be inclusive.

Maritza said...

Well done!

Alan said...

Very well said. I've never heard one "reason" why gay marriage is a threat to straight marriage. Not one. Ever.

Lori said...

Congratulations on making the main page! I thought your response was very well done, as well as your rebuttal to the marriage is a religious right argument. Thanks for writing it.

ChickOnTheRoad said...

hi there... great blog post and i like that you take the time to debate with your commenters. You have an interesting argument. I to believe that it is not a religious right however, i can see your view point as well...

anyways, I was just surfing through blogs and came across yours. Interestingly, I recently wrote a blog about homosexuals and their discrimination in Australia. check my blog to have a look, i'd love to know what you think of my opinions.

Rgds

www.chickontheroad.blogspot.com

People in the Sun said...

Thanks again. I'm glad you liked it enough to comment on it. I'm just starting on the blogging thing and it means a lot to have people give me positive feedback (even thanking me, yikes).

Have a good November.

Adopt black cats. Adopt Pit Bulls. But maybe not at the same time...

thejunkyswife said...

Well said.

Leo said...

Great post! I too thought it was very well thought out, and well written. I especially enjoyed your rebuttal and as one of those gay/lesbians your writing about I appreciate you taking the time to give serious thought and space on your blog to this subject. Thanks.

People in the Sun said...

Thanks. It's amazing to me that things like that are even questionable and that so many people dedicate so much of their time to hurting others.

Post a Comment

Related Posts with Thumbnails