prop102

Can someone please explain to me.....

Okay, a little buffer before I jump right in, since the last post was so...

Anyway. I was looking for something on my desk and I bumped into a piece of mail I set aside for later. I guess now it's later. Prepare for my gasket to blow right here.

"Say Yes! on 102 Yesformarriage.com"

Those of you who've had the pleasure of having a conversation with me on topics regarding DOMA and its ilk know what's coming. For the rest of you, this is your last warning to wander away before I vent my steam.

Still here? Oh, goody!

Can. Someone. Please. Explain. To. Me.....

How does a couple of men getting married next week threaten my eighteen-year old marriage?

Okay. Sorry. Needed to get that out. But seriously....Is my marriage any weaker today because Ellen DeGeneres committed herself by law to Portia de Rossi?

I get that those who have religious reasons for not agreeing with homosexuals getting married might want to prevent them ("the gays") from getting married in their churches. I get that some of the really conservative people out there don't even want to think about what "those people" do behind closed doors. "Lalalalalalala, I'm not listening!" (That's okay, I wasn't telling!)

But when discussion about changing the Constitution of a State or the Country comes up, we're talking about the legal definition of marriage. We're talking about the protections, rights and responsibilities defined by the State---and reciprocally recognized by all fifty States in Article IV, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America:

Article. IV.

Section. 1. Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

(see for yourself)

So, please, would someone explain why it is bothering you (the conservatives who want to prevent "those people" from gaining legally recognized marriage rights and responsibilites) that there are people out there who want to declare before the world their commitment to one person?

"Those people" want to stand before their family and friends and say, "I love this person. I want to be responsible for the care and protection of this person. I want to be able to care for them, provide them with health care and retirement benefits. I want to own a home together with them. I want to grow old with them. I want to build a family with them."

And please, let me short-circuit the excuse I really don't want to hear: but gays can't have children. Uhm, neither can many straight people out there, but there's no one trying to pass a law denying marriage to sterile people. And there's no one trying to prevent sterile people from adopting and building a family. So, please don't try that routine. I'm not buying it.

I've known gays both promiscuous and chaste. I've known straights both promiscuous and chaste. I've known married straights who've been less faithful than some of the commited gays I've known. And trust me, you can't "peg" all the gays out there. Honest. Someone you know... someone you may never have suspected... is gay.

And for the record, you'll note I haven't stepped forward to identify, "But I am a straight supporter." Or not. Frankly, what I am is my own frakking business. These days, I like to keep that behind closed doors, thank you kindly.

If everyone wasn't so busy trying to segregate and deny, I'm betting most of the lesbians and gay men out there would be (and many already are!) pretty quiet about who they are too. If everybody would quit trying to poke their heads in the sand and pretend "those people" don't exist, we could all just get on with the work of living and loving, instead of having to fight to live and love.

Syndicate content