Gay Marriage
The first time I heard about this issue, my gut reaction was that marriage has always been between a male and a female, so why change it? But the more I thought about it, the more I realized I really couldn't come up with a reason why people in relationships that they wish to make permanent shouldn't have that right. This is one of a growing number of issues on which I find myself at odds with the Republican party.
I do understand that having an amendment would save a lot of court battles regarding states' rights, whether a marriage in one state has to be recognized in another, and whether the Defense of Marriage Act is constitutional, but avoiding the enrichment of lawyers is not a good reason to add something to the Constitution that takes away rights. We once had a steaming pile of crap added to our Constitution that took away our rights, and we all know how wonderfully prohibition worked.
The preservation of the sanctity of marriage is cited by many who oppose marriage between homosexuals. How have heterosexuals treated the institution? Celebrities are a bigger threat to this sanctity than gays. Britney Spears went on a Vegas bender a while back and ended up married, only to immediately regret it (after seeing that load she is married to now, I think she should have kept the first one). Jennifer Lopez is younger than I am and is on her third marriage. Rush Limbaugh can't seem to settle on a spouse, and keeping up with Newt Gingrich's love life gets a little complex at times (and it is also a very disturbing visual). Of course, their lives are none of my business, but that is the point of legalizing same-sex marriage. Their marriage does not affect mine and it never will.
While I think this debate makes Republicans look bad, there is little room for moralizing from Democrats. It was their two term president who signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOMA
Liberal bloggers have decried opposition to gay marriage as an example of horrible bigotry on the part of the right. Ohio Democratic house candidate Paul Hackett (and former Netroots hero) went even further, by saying this:
Hackett said in a Jan. 15 column in The Columbus Dispatch: "The Republican Party has been hijacked by the religious fanatics that, in my opinion, aren't a whole lot different than Osama bin Laden and a lot of the other religious nuts around the world." Hackett also said the practice of denying homosexuals equal rights is un-American. The newspaper asked Hackett if that meant the 62 percent of Ohioans who voted to ban equal marriage were un-American.
"If what they believe is that we're going to have a scale on judging which Americans have equal rights, yeah, that's un-American," Hackett said.
So according to this line of thinking, Howard Dean, the late Sen. Paul Wellstone (who voted for DOMA), and Pres. Bill Clinton are all hateful, bigoted, and anti-American. DNC Chairman Howard Dean recently went on The 700 Club and attempted to get some of those Confederate flag-waving voters by stating that the Democratic Party platform says that marriage is between a man and a woman. However, that is not what the platform states. Not sure what is funnier, that a guy like Dean, who once seemed proud about his relationship with the gay community, is now attempting to stroke off Pat Robertson, or that this brilliant guy doesn't even know what his party platform is on a very explosive issue.
http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/05/051106dean.htm
If those who are opposed to gay marriage are constantly bombarded with insults, it will be more difficult to turn their opinion around. Dismissing these people as bigots is not going to win their hearts and minds on this issue. As for changing the Constitution, how about getting rid of the Electoral College instead of wasting all our time with something that no one believes will pass?
I do understand that having an amendment would save a lot of court battles regarding states' rights, whether a marriage in one state has to be recognized in another, and whether the Defense of Marriage Act is constitutional, but avoiding the enrichment of lawyers is not a good reason to add something to the Constitution that takes away rights. We once had a steaming pile of crap added to our Constitution that took away our rights, and we all know how wonderfully prohibition worked.
The preservation of the sanctity of marriage is cited by many who oppose marriage between homosexuals. How have heterosexuals treated the institution? Celebrities are a bigger threat to this sanctity than gays. Britney Spears went on a Vegas bender a while back and ended up married, only to immediately regret it (after seeing that load she is married to now, I think she should have kept the first one). Jennifer Lopez is younger than I am and is on her third marriage. Rush Limbaugh can't seem to settle on a spouse, and keeping up with Newt Gingrich's love life gets a little complex at times (and it is also a very disturbing visual). Of course, their lives are none of my business, but that is the point of legalizing same-sex marriage. Their marriage does not affect mine and it never will.
While I think this debate makes Republicans look bad, there is little room for moralizing from Democrats. It was their two term president who signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOMA
Liberal bloggers have decried opposition to gay marriage as an example of horrible bigotry on the part of the right. Ohio Democratic house candidate Paul Hackett (and former Netroots hero) went even further, by saying this:
Hackett said in a Jan. 15 column in The Columbus Dispatch: "The Republican Party has been hijacked by the religious fanatics that, in my opinion, aren't a whole lot different than Osama bin Laden and a lot of the other religious nuts around the world." Hackett also said the practice of denying homosexuals equal rights is un-American. The newspaper asked Hackett if that meant the 62 percent of Ohioans who voted to ban equal marriage were un-American.
"If what they believe is that we're going to have a scale on judging which Americans have equal rights, yeah, that's un-American," Hackett said.
So according to this line of thinking, Howard Dean, the late Sen. Paul Wellstone (who voted for DOMA), and Pres. Bill Clinton are all hateful, bigoted, and anti-American. DNC Chairman Howard Dean recently went on The 700 Club and attempted to get some of those Confederate flag-waving voters by stating that the Democratic Party platform says that marriage is between a man and a woman. However, that is not what the platform states. Not sure what is funnier, that a guy like Dean, who once seemed proud about his relationship with the gay community, is now attempting to stroke off Pat Robertson, or that this brilliant guy doesn't even know what his party platform is on a very explosive issue.
http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/05/051106dean.htm
If those who are opposed to gay marriage are constantly bombarded with insults, it will be more difficult to turn their opinion around. Dismissing these people as bigots is not going to win their hearts and minds on this issue. As for changing the Constitution, how about getting rid of the Electoral College instead of wasting all our time with something that no one believes will pass?
posted by Doug at 7:37 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home