My thoughts on Prop 8 and the difference between a "civil union" and a "marriage".
This isn't going to be earth shattering insight, I'm sure someone somewhere said it earlier, or better, or both.
With the swiftly approaching date of my marriage, I've been obviously thinking a lot about it. And not just idiotic things like chair bows, but kind of a deep level running commentary about what it means.
And the other night Matt and I sat down to choose/write vows. And it became clear to me why we cannot offer people a lack of equality in regards to marriage. The idea of seperate but equal has never worked before. I'm not sure why so many relatively liberal heterosexual people think it is going to work now.
To be very clear, in case I get muddled later. I am so firmly against Prop 8, that when I learn that people I otherwise like and respect are for it, it makes me feel ill and sad and I wonder how on earth I will ever look at them the same again.
But I do understand why the issue isn't clear cut in their minds.
A lot of arguments that are PRO PROP 8 have to do with the concepts of "marriage" as a religious institution. People will suggest that we should simply "call it something else" when homosexuals marry, and that solves the problem. Then the religion that they espouse will not have to acknowledge the sanctity of a union between two people that they believe the Bible states should never be together in the first place. And I see nothing wrong with religions refusing to marry homosexuals in their churches. If I were homosexual, I wouldn't want to be married in, say, a Mormon Temple. But growing up I knew a boy who was both gay, and mormon. He was one of the most tormented people I have ever met. ( I digress) Those are not the minds we are changing this week, those are the minds we may never change.
Marriage is not a religious institution in all cases, but it's definitely not simply a legal construct. When I stand up in 6 days to offer my lifelong love and support and tell my fiance that I honor him, with all that I am, and all that I have. I am not offering him heath benefits and the ability to choose whether to take me off life support.
I am offering him a piece of my soul. I am offering him something spiritual. My commitment is about the faith I have in him, and in myself, and in the strength of us together. Marriage is about jumping off a cliff together emotionally. About binding yourself to a person in a way that will never allow you to be disentangled, even if you choose to sever legal ties. Once you say those words, you will forever have a piece of this person. Look at all those descriptive words I just used: soul, spiritual, faith, binding, forever...
Look religious doesn't it?
And for some people, it is about God and having some higher power recognize the union. Sure. I'm for marriage meaning to you whatever you want it to mean. To me it's not about God. I took god out of it. The only blessing Matt and I are asking is the one that our friends and family will be giving us by witnessing.
And so I do see how confusing it can be, to be a person married in a time when you didn't take God out of things. And to look at your marriage and feel that to boil it down to a legal construct is a cheapening of the faith you had. I would also completely reject that idea.
But I think what you confuse with religion, is your spirituality. Offering equality to everyone who loves and has faith deosn't cheapen what you have. It doesn't effect what you have. The same way, my secular ceremony doesn't assault a Catholic wedding. You cannot really believe that homosexuality is just fine, and be against their ability to marry. You might think you can, but what you are saying is that because of the sex of who they choose to sleep with, they are unworthy. They are not capable of having that faith in themselves, in eachother. They cannot make that commitment. And when you demonstrate that you believe that fundamentally you believe they are NOT CAPABLE of human emotion and commitment, you say they are inferior.
When you say that offering homosexuals the same legal protections of marriage will lead to fraud. You are saying that they not only will lie to get benefits, but that they are liars who don't take commitment seriously enough. Let me break something to you, human beings are liars. People "marry" all the time to get green cards, to get benefits, to get legal protections. People who are heterosexuals. To ignore that the legal system is already assaulted with this, and say it is because of "the gays" is bigoted and wrong. People making "legal arguments" about why we should't legalize homosexual marriage, are in effect, bigots. If there is already abuse in the system, then saying people will abuse the system makes no sense, unless of course you mean THOSE people, those untrustworthy OTHER people.
To offer THOSE people a civil union is to give them the very legal protections you don't want them to have, and expect them to abuse. AND it denies them the right to have that intangible spiritual connection that a marriage is, recognized. All because you believe that to "allow" them that connection is to cheapen yours.
Are some of your best friends black?
My marriage is about a lot of things, and Matt and I are the people who decide what those things are. I am against proposition 8 because I believe that the state doesn't have the right to tell me what my marriage is about, or that I am not capable of making that commitment based on who I choose to have sex with. And so, the state is not capable of making that decision for anyone. If you recognize that homosexuals should get all the legal and financial benefits and constructs of a marriage, you are a bigot if you think that you should then refuse to call it a marriage. You and I do not have the right to dictate the spiritual component of commitment between two people, any two people at all.
(If you think homosexuality is wrong and that they should all be brainwashed in camps until they "get right with the lord" or some such... What the fuck are you doing here? And how can I get you off my planet? Regardless, I'm not talking to you. You and I will never have anything to say to one another. )
With the swiftly approaching date of my marriage, I've been obviously thinking a lot about it. And not just idiotic things like chair bows, but kind of a deep level running commentary about what it means.
And the other night Matt and I sat down to choose/write vows. And it became clear to me why we cannot offer people a lack of equality in regards to marriage. The idea of seperate but equal has never worked before. I'm not sure why so many relatively liberal heterosexual people think it is going to work now.
To be very clear, in case I get muddled later. I am so firmly against Prop 8, that when I learn that people I otherwise like and respect are for it, it makes me feel ill and sad and I wonder how on earth I will ever look at them the same again.
But I do understand why the issue isn't clear cut in their minds.
A lot of arguments that are PRO PROP 8 have to do with the concepts of "marriage" as a religious institution. People will suggest that we should simply "call it something else" when homosexuals marry, and that solves the problem. Then the religion that they espouse will not have to acknowledge the sanctity of a union between two people that they believe the Bible states should never be together in the first place. And I see nothing wrong with religions refusing to marry homosexuals in their churches. If I were homosexual, I wouldn't want to be married in, say, a Mormon Temple. But growing up I knew a boy who was both gay, and mormon. He was one of the most tormented people I have ever met. ( I digress) Those are not the minds we are changing this week, those are the minds we may never change.
Marriage is not a religious institution in all cases, but it's definitely not simply a legal construct. When I stand up in 6 days to offer my lifelong love and support and tell my fiance that I honor him, with all that I am, and all that I have. I am not offering him heath benefits and the ability to choose whether to take me off life support.
I am offering him a piece of my soul. I am offering him something spiritual. My commitment is about the faith I have in him, and in myself, and in the strength of us together. Marriage is about jumping off a cliff together emotionally. About binding yourself to a person in a way that will never allow you to be disentangled, even if you choose to sever legal ties. Once you say those words, you will forever have a piece of this person. Look at all those descriptive words I just used: soul, spiritual, faith, binding, forever...
Look religious doesn't it?
And for some people, it is about God and having some higher power recognize the union. Sure. I'm for marriage meaning to you whatever you want it to mean. To me it's not about God. I took god out of it. The only blessing Matt and I are asking is the one that our friends and family will be giving us by witnessing.
And so I do see how confusing it can be, to be a person married in a time when you didn't take God out of things. And to look at your marriage and feel that to boil it down to a legal construct is a cheapening of the faith you had. I would also completely reject that idea.
But I think what you confuse with religion, is your spirituality. Offering equality to everyone who loves and has faith deosn't cheapen what you have. It doesn't effect what you have. The same way, my secular ceremony doesn't assault a Catholic wedding. You cannot really believe that homosexuality is just fine, and be against their ability to marry. You might think you can, but what you are saying is that because of the sex of who they choose to sleep with, they are unworthy. They are not capable of having that faith in themselves, in eachother. They cannot make that commitment. And when you demonstrate that you believe that fundamentally you believe they are NOT CAPABLE of human emotion and commitment, you say they are inferior.
When you say that offering homosexuals the same legal protections of marriage will lead to fraud. You are saying that they not only will lie to get benefits, but that they are liars who don't take commitment seriously enough. Let me break something to you, human beings are liars. People "marry" all the time to get green cards, to get benefits, to get legal protections. People who are heterosexuals. To ignore that the legal system is already assaulted with this, and say it is because of "the gays" is bigoted and wrong. People making "legal arguments" about why we should't legalize homosexual marriage, are in effect, bigots. If there is already abuse in the system, then saying people will abuse the system makes no sense, unless of course you mean THOSE people, those untrustworthy OTHER people.
To offer THOSE people a civil union is to give them the very legal protections you don't want them to have, and expect them to abuse. AND it denies them the right to have that intangible spiritual connection that a marriage is, recognized. All because you believe that to "allow" them that connection is to cheapen yours.
Are some of your best friends black?
My marriage is about a lot of things, and Matt and I are the people who decide what those things are. I am against proposition 8 because I believe that the state doesn't have the right to tell me what my marriage is about, or that I am not capable of making that commitment based on who I choose to have sex with. And so, the state is not capable of making that decision for anyone. If you recognize that homosexuals should get all the legal and financial benefits and constructs of a marriage, you are a bigot if you think that you should then refuse to call it a marriage. You and I do not have the right to dictate the spiritual component of commitment between two people, any two people at all.
(If you think homosexuality is wrong and that they should all be brainwashed in camps until they "get right with the lord" or some such... What the fuck are you doing here? And how can I get you off my planet? Regardless, I'm not talking to you. You and I will never have anything to say to one another. )