Amor vincit omnia; exceptio firmat regulam in casibus non exceptis
Not that I really want to start out on a political foot, but this is what I’ve been thinking about lately, (read; the past hour.)
I find it absolutely astonishing that people run their mouth, on both sides of this argument, without really understanding what is being discussed.
We have an established institution in America: Civil Marriage; the recognition of unions between men and women. Along with this recognition comes a few Tax breaks, a number of other, mundane things happen… for instance, automatic associations are assumed as far as Hospital visitation rights, and power of attorney, beneficiaries in cases of death…. and these sorts of things.
These other things aren’t really worth talking about— anyone can go to a lawyer’s office and be legally bound to another person, sign over power of attorney and inheritance, and it can all be done cheaper than for the cost of a marriage. I don’t mean to speak on these things, and frankly, if they were the issue, then those are the things that everyone would be talking about, not marriage. No, this will concern largely economics, and the recognition itself.
Conservatives have a vested interest in protecting their social ideal… one can hardly blame them for that… Liberal opponents that deny that the civil institution as it exists between men and women will shatter in a few generations with a such a redefinition… those people are wrong… – They have not been paying attention. There is almost nothing more important to any community, concerning how it’s course is piloted, than how the family unit is constructed, and how children are raised. This is simply undeniable… no matter what value, merit, or appreciation is shown for truth otherwise; if children are not going to be instilled with the proper lessons, then it’s all over in 20 years, anyway.
But that is no reason to avoid change. It is not a real arguement in defense of traditional marriage.
In their almighty reason, a huge percentage of Conservatives have decided to either fight change in the name of traditionalism, or presumptively in protection of religion.
And in the other corner.
The Pro-Gay Rights community seeks to alter this status quo: To allow the state’s recognition of unions to encompass same-sex unions. In their vast pool of academia professionals, they have chosen… of all things: Human rights.
Now, color me crazy here, but when did either of these things become exclusively pertinent?
The reason that each camp has taken such a bizarre approach to the topic, is because the members of our society are incredibly, ridiculously comfortable with another kind of union; the union of Social and Civil Marriages.
Both of these groups are talking about Civil Marriage like it’s Social marriage.
Conservatives, by and large, are not opposed, per se, to Social Marriages for Gay Couples, at least, not in the sense where it would be ‘illegal’. The ramifications of such a stance, would be swat teams kicking in the doors at Churches were Gay social marriages ceremonies are taking place, and either arrests or executions taking place in response. No one is advocating that; and that’s what it means to be denied the ‘right’ to marry.
What Conservatives -whether they are aware of it or not- are opposed to, are Civil marriages for homosexuals.
So, why do we have civil marriage?
There’s really no standard answer to this question, which is why people are so confused.
Again, Liberals are incorrect in suggesting it is a ‘right’… a Government may not have the wherewithal to catalogue all of the citizens, let alone their union with other citizens… and even if they do, who is to say that things should, or must-needs be run that way?
Conservatives are wrong in that civil marriage is a religious institution, it simply isn’t. Keep your Snafu out of my religion, by the by.
So, here is my read of all of this:
State Recognized Marriage amounts to a benefit. Benefits, by definition, are not equal. The reason that you give extra rations to people that work voluntarily on Saturday, is because they help the farm, you extend that benefit as a perk to people who exhibit behaviors that ‘the people’ have deemed worthy of encouragement. I’ve spoken to many liberals and so-called libertarians that persist, “Well, whatever, make the benefits equal”…
Uh, no, that’s called communism, not an option– Stalin, piles of dead bodies, Boxer getting carted off to the glue factory, Trust me, we don’t want to go that way. The counter is almost always– “Okay, equal opportunity for unequal benefits”
The fact of the matter is that our society is not fascist. We do not register people’s sexual orientations. the law, does not, in fact, know the difference between a gay man and a heterosexual man. A homosexual man can go down to the courthouse with a woman, and enter into a marriage contract with her, same as any heterosexual man.
It is definitively equal.
I know this comes across as being a bit tongue-in-cheek, but the illustration is this: This is not a civil rights issue.
Marriage is extended to heterosexual couples because society likes the idea of a responsible mother and father raising children so that they aren’t hooligans, so that they are productive members of the human race.
The harsh facts responsible for society getting that silly idea into their head:
-Heterosexual couples can produce children– The man has a penis, and the woman has a vagina. Just the facts, ma’me.
-There is no avoiding the fundamental truth that men and women are different. In a society built on both types of units, it’s effective to have one of each raising a child.
- The supposed finality of marriage is appropriate, considering, unlike other mammalians, it takes a decade or two (or more) to get a child up to snuff on how to live without dying.
If gays want gay marriage, the way to do it is to show– explain– that there is some benefit to society for them to be recognized, for them to get that pat on the back, and a little pressure off the social burden for services rendered. – not whine, bitch (yeah.), and carry on about personal freedoms. They have them.
Even being completely tolerant of homosexuals in my community, and calling more than a few ‘good friends’ in my theater circles; I can’t fathom what merit to society there is to be offered from Same sex couples porking legitimately versus illegitimately; and a whole slew of reasons come to my mind for why legitimate sexual relationships between men and women are a good idea….. and the worse thing for the pro-gay community, or maybe more accurately, their agenda… is no one anywhere is really try to convince me that there is any merit to be found.