The first wedding I ever went to was a gay wedding (actually, now that I think of it, I'm pretty sure that's the only wedding I've ever been to). My best friend in elementary school's mothers were getting married after the state of Massachusetts deemed it legal. Now, mind you, I was a young kid. There is not much I remember from that time period in my life. But I remember that wedding. I remember the look on the two women's faces as they kissed, representing the commencement of an eternal bond known as matrimony. They were in love and at that exact moment, to them, nothing else mattered but each other.
The traditional definition of marriage involves the eternal bond of a man and a woman. Many people in this day and age try to take that literally and claim that it should only be between a man and a woman. I have a real problem with that. To me, that signifies that people deem the gender to be the most important part of the definition. I think the most important part of a marriage is that its eternal. I see so many marriages end in divorce and it bothers me. So many people who are opposed to seeing two men get married will gladly watch Kim Kardashion (I probably didn't spell that right, and frankly, it's not worth my time to look it up) get married and divorce within a year. Last I checked, a year is not equivalent to eternity. Marriage is a holy thing. Falling in love is sacred. I believe it is far more important to marry someone you love and make it last forever than to make sure it is of the appropriate gender.
100 years ago, my own parents probably wouldn't have been allowed to get married. An upper class protestant from Rochester and a middle class Jewish woman from NYC. Something as trivial as that would have stopped them. But they are, and they have been incredible parents as a result. Some of the most loving, caring parents I know are gay. I never understand when people argue that they won't make fitting parents. I disagree completely. If a child is being raised in a home where he is cared for, than what's the difference if there are two dicks or four boobs?
Who am I to tell someone who they can and cannot love? Who are you to tell them? Nobody chooses it, it just happens. I did not choose to fall in love with Emily. Do you think an 18 year old kid at his first college party wanted to fall head over heels in love with someone? No. But I did, and there's no sense fighting it. The same is true for all gay couples. So that guy loves another guy. So what? Who cares? Does it affect you in anyway? My guess is no. Why does another person's happiness make so many people uncomfortable?
People feel that it is a violation of the Bible and its teachings. I don't even deem this argument necessary to address. Times change. Move on. In the words of the great Macklemore: "'God loves all his children', is somehow forgotten, while we paraphrase a book written 3,500 years ago..."
While the striking down of DOMA is not sufficient, it is a start. It certainly is nice to know that people are beginning to recognize that it is an issue that deserves addressing.
I want to end with one final remark. There is nothing I hate more than when people slam their beliefs down your throat. I'm as opinionated as anyone, and I certainly love to share my opinions, but there is a clear difference between talking to someone about these issues, or preaching at them in a condescending manor. So like I said, if anyone feels strongly against what I have to say and wants to shoot me an email, feel free, I'd love to chat. But the second you try telling me what is morally wrong and right, and not just what you believe to be wrong or right, the conversation is over. I don't care what anyone has to say, this is one issue that my views will never change on.
love it
ReplyDeleteI'm going to play devil's advocate a little bit here (for anyone who doesn't know who I am, I'm a big supporter of gay rights)
ReplyDeleteI think the underlying issue with re-defining "marriage" is where our society draws our ethical standards from. If we're willing to oppose religious definitions of "holy matrimony", what's to say we won't eventually deviate from the other ethical standards offered in nearly all religious texts?
My American history teacher in high school raised an important question (and one relevant to this discussion): which settlement better represents the founding intentions of America, Jamestown or Plymouth? The former was an economically centered business action, aimed at bettering England's financial standing under the then popular ideology of Mercantilism (wikipedia it). Impacts of this train of thought are still prominent in our culture: our faith in capitalism and the "American Dream." The latter, on the other hand, was an exodus in an effort to establish a new society based on conservative Christian ideals. I think that many Americans, especially those in the Northeast, under-appreciate how religious our country really is, especially compared to European states. I'm not a religious person at all, and there are claims made in many religious texts that nearly the entire population has already deemed invalid, yet some ethical and moral standards which Western civilization has been founded upon stem from biblical lessons (in addition, many of these norms are also found in the Islamic text, the Quran). In this sense, religious texts can serve as a benchmark to be used to establish ethical and moral considerations for our society.
As I said, I'm not religious, and yet I find my moral compass to be rather closely in-line with those shared by devout Christians, and even most Muslims. However, I consider my ethical considerations to be instilled by my parents, my community, my peers, and myself. But without the influence of religion on ensuring general and shared norms across a some-what homogeneous american culture, what's to prevent factioning and subsequent differences?
So how can we as the rising generation of this nation ensure that we as a population are generally "on the same page" when it comes to moral issues? Swing to the right and revert back to religious texts? I don't think that's the answer, both due to many outdated clauses and new societal trends. Do we rely on parents to ensure that new americans are morally sound? Unfortunately I've seen "Cops" and other shows on similar communities in America and I honestly cannot trust people like that to raise morally sound children. So what then? Ethics class in school? Legislation? If there's anything I've learned as a political science major it's that laws can only catalyze or curb societal issues, not generate or halt them.
I don't have a solution to this problem in particular nor how to alter/manipulate social norms in general (if I did I'd like to think I'd be sitting in the president's cabinet). What I do know, is that for most of my life my "America" was the North-East; never farther south than D.C and never farther west than Syracuse, NY. With that limited perspective, I can hardly call myself "American." It is IMPERATIVE that we as a generation travel this country in order to learn, appreciate, respect, and understand how our peers in different parts of the US live their lives and view the world. I will always believe that our differences make this country both unique and great, but opinions without an appreciation of opposing views are a sign of ignorance and a lack of understanding.