![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Jumping on the bandwagon....
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.
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.