Jumping on the bandwagon....

[poltr1]

My variation:

Copy this sentence into your LJ if you're in a heterosexual marriage -- or have been at one time -- and you don't want it"protected" by the bigots who think that gay marriage hurts it somehow.


I initially sat this one out because I'm no longer married, and therefore thought I couldn't participate.

What a loaded statement this is. It implies that if a person doesn't support gay marriage, they're automatically a bigot.

Marriage has become an overloaded word in our society and culture. There's the legal context, the social context, and the religious context. All of them seem to have melded together.

I've known a few committed gay couples for some time. Somehow, it seems discriminatory to think that they can't unite for life with a ceremony, get the same benefits, and so on. What about civil unions? To me, that sounds like a second-class marriage -- it may have the same legal and social context as a marriage, but lacks the religious context.

I know, this flies in the face of the Judeo-Christian mores on which our society is based. But I think it's time we evolve from that which shackles us. Years ago, there were laws prohibiting interracial marriages. Those laws have since been stricken down.

Some folks on the far right worry that this would be a gateway to legalizing other types of relationships, e.g. bestiality. I don't believe so.

Comments

[tigertoy.livejournal.com]

Arguing that gay marriage would lead toward legal marriage between humans and animals would be laughable if it weren't so fundamentally insulting. They have a much more valid point when they argue that opening the definition of marriage to include same sex couples might move us closer to legally recognizing marriages of more than two people.

Of course, they present that idea as if it were a *bad* thing.

The farther our society moves away from the idea that any adult who is not in a lifelong monogamous heterosexual relationship is at best a second class citizen, the better. Gay marriage, plural marriage, free love -- as long as it's honest and consensual, it's all good. Good in the sense of actively making the world a better place, the opposite of evil, not just in the sense of I won't complain about it.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

Word. :)

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

I've been watching this wash across my friendslist with interest, and cheering on everyone who posted it. But you have me not just cheering but thinking.

It implies that if a person doesn't support gay marriage, they're automatically a bigot.


I thought about this a bit. I guess there could be other reasons, from 'marriage as an institution is a mess' to 'it would cost employers more in insurance and thus be bad for the economy' (both statements I've seen more than one person make), but... I saw this meme as a response to California's Proposition 8, and that one really is fueled by bigotry, as were the similar but fortunately fizzling efforts in MA after same-sex marriage was legalized here. So that's the context I saw this phrasing in.

In the long run it would be good, if potentially difficult, if the concept of adults-forming-a-family could be freed from the massive baggage of 'marriage'. But right now when we're less than a week from California possibly dissolving a whole bunch of marriages (I really, really hope they don't), I think this meme was aimed at more proximate concerns.

[(Anonymous)]

That is quite an inflammatory statement. It seems intentionally hurtful to label someone a bigot just becayse they do not support gay marriage. I am well aquainted with several in the clergy who do not support gay marriage but at the same time do not hate the gay community but welcome them into the church with open loving arms. Calling those in opposition to gay marriage bigots is the same king of narrowmindedness that supporters accuse their opponents of.

Randy

[poltr1]

I knew you'd come out of the woodwork sooner or later. :-) You raise some good points, and I thank you for bringing them up.

[athenawindsong.livejournal.com]

I'm gonna paint a target on my chest by saying that if you (you in general, not you specifically) do not support gay marriage, you ARE a bigot.

I'm a huge supporter of gay rights and I say that sexual orientation should have no place in the services of church (you say no to one "abomination" you must say no to all of them) or state.

Maybe this makes me narrow minded or bigotted somehow, but I'd rather be that than deny any group of human beings the same rights anyone else.

[stormraven37.livejournal.com]

"What about civil unions? To me, that sounds like a second-class marriage -- it may have the same legal and social context as a marriage, but lacks the religious context."

For some yes. And I think it's crap but blissfully we now attend the Unitarian Universalist Church of Lexington. Who not only supports Same sex union civilly but religiously as well. IT's one of the HUGE appeals of the church for us.

Two weeks ago we hung a banner out alongside teh Church signage by the road. It states "CIVIL MARRIAGE IS A CIVIL RIGHT" and our church actually religiously supports this doctrine. our minister has performed same sex weddings and after teh banner was hung the church indeed had a "reception" for all same sex couples in teh church.

So it's not entirely non religious - it merely depends on what your church's stance on it is.