|
My
coverage of yesterday's Supreme Court case about the fallacy of
gay marriage being a civil right will now be contrasted with my
personal belief that if you do create marriage for gays, even if
it is as prejudiced in its implementation as straight marriage
is by limiting what marriage is, then one must demand that gays
have exactly the same protections, benefits, responsibilities,
and other provisions so enjoyed by real marriages of a man and a
woman. It is
ironic that the best Democrat President in the post-JFK era was
the man who signed the current repugnant law about banning
Federal benefits to gay couples. After all his
pathetic philandering and lying and implementing another
anti-gay policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", William
Jefferson Blythe Clinton added insult to injury by signing the
very law that is being discussed before the Supreme Court today.
|
I fully support the
striking down of DOMA and its pathetic anti-freedom
provisions. While I find that the position
advocated by most gays to be repugnant when it comes to selfishly
seeking marriage only in their own vision of it, I do have to
demand equality where there is an obvious violation of
it. If gays are allowed to marry or civil unions
are created for all, then let's ensure that there is equal
protection under the law so that all marriages are equal.
It is a shame that the
advocates of "gay marriage" don't instead seek a
broad-based marriage concept that really doesn't put limits on the
institution and clearly separates religious marriage from civil
unions recognized and protected by the law and the
State. I simply find the position of extending
marriage to gays as disgusting and distasteful as limiting it to
just straights. Advocating a position based on
exclusion is not fair nor just. Who are we to deny
groups of adults who have a different concept of love and
living? If those individuals want to undertake a
committed relationship within their own sphere of love, then let
them be bound to it and deal with the consequences of violating
those vows. But let us not be as simple and
repugnant as straights by institutionalizing bigotry on the number
of participants in marriage just as straights advocate bigotry on
gender inclusion in marriage.
|
I don't find allowing gay marriage to be "disgusting", "distasteful" or "repugnant", nor do I think gay couples need to reconcile themselves to being discriminated against until Americans become more accepting of polygamy, which will never happen.
ReplyDeleteWe can take one step at a time. And we are.