One Love


Judge Walker has ruled: Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

I’m looking forward to reading his decision at lunch, but I could have spared him the trouble of writing it. After all, in Loving v. Virginia (1967), Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote: “Marriage is one of the ‘basic civil rights of man,’ fundamental to our very existence and survival…”

As I pointed out to a friend of mine during an ongoing and heated debate on the subject,  it’s not so important that those words were initially intended for interracial marriage. The point is the same whether you are discussing the right of a black man to marry a white woman or you are discussing the right of a man to marry another man.

“Marriage is religious.” Okay, I agree with you here — the institution of “marriage” has been traditionally understood for centuries to be associated with the sanction of a clergyperson. However, since the founding of our country marriage has also been a civil institution, through which couples become eligible for tangible legal benefits – for example, the right for one partner to make decisions regarding the medical care of the other partner, or to visit said partner in the hospital. Married couples have equal right to children resulting from the union, either born or adopted.

The issue of children is perhaps the most contentious, come to think of it. After all, two men or two women together are biologically incapable of producing a child. But wait: couples are still able to have children through artificial insemination or to adopt children without families — both avenues of “procreation” explored by heterosexual couples with fertility issues. If a “marriage” is to be declared invalid because of a couple’s inability to give natural birth to their own biological child, what does that say for the hundreds of thousands of hetero couples who aren’t physically capable of procreation? Once again there is a tangible difference between the treatment of an infertile heterosexual couple and the treatment of a homosexual couple.

Back to the main point: married couples enjoy more benefits than domestic partners. The last time I checked, the United States claims to be a nation of liberty and equality; therefore, all those who wish to enter into a legally-binding marital partnership should be offered that opportunity, and should enjoy the same benefits of doing so.

Here’s something to consider: in what way does any couple exchanging vows under any circumstances violate your personal freedom? Where is the personal harm to you? Nobody is standing behind you with a gun pressed to your back demanding that you attend any ceremony with which you disagree, and allowing same-sex couples to wed does not in any way undermine the validity of your own marriage.

I’ll let you do your own research on this one, but this is how Shan sees it.

Love is love, and you will never convince me otherwise.

Enhanced by Zemanta

One comment

  1. […] Wow, I am just messing up all over the place here. I almost forgot to mention the funeral protests in which members of the WBC hold up signs printed with such inclusive messages as “God hates fags”, and the interviews like this one where even Sean Hannity — that’s right, of FOX News — calls out the heiress of the WBC legacy as a loony Lucy. (Or is that Psycho Shelly?) I overlooked the people who campaigned for Proposition 8, an unconstitutional piece of legislation that attempted to take from same-sex couples the freedom to marry (For more on the Prop 8 issue, see “One Love“.) […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: