I’ve been following California’s Proposition 8 from the sidelines. I’m so confused about the whole thing.
I’m not Christian. I know Jesus loves me, I thank him for that and I’m hoping that if all the mumbo jumbo ends up being real, I can just confess my sins, repent and get on with life.
But personally, I could never follow any doctrine that wants to regulate what kind of harmless pleasure I want to get from my own body. I don’t think it’s anyone’s business who my partner in crime(s) is/are going to be. So I’m not here to preach and I’m no prude. But I can’t separate marriage from religion either because so far, they’re intertwined.
There’s no doubt that Christianity bans homosexuality. Even though churches are propping up here and there with their own interpretations of the bible but Scripture is clear:
Leviticus: Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, it is an abomination.
Leviticus: If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
I don’t understand people like Rev. Ed Bacon. This dude has gone on the record saying that he is embarrassed that the Christian religion is “unfortunately…in large part responsible for this act of bigotry”. He’s talking about support for Prop 8. What kind of a reverend is he? Has he read the bible recently? He can call it bigotry but from a religious view, the church is right and this charlatan Mollah is blasphemous and heretical! Why hasn’t he been excommunicated? It’s bizarre to see a defender of the faith turn against it. Is this guy some kind of Henry VIII, Fideit Defensor unilaterally going against religious logic in the aim of another reformation? He has to be gay.
It’s like people who look to the Pope for a blessing on abortion rights. The Pope has a job to do on earth, and his God tells him abortion is a sin. We have to agree with his version of his religion. But I’m pro choice, so I say, Fuck the Pope. He can interpret his religion, I’ll do what I think is right, I don’t even WANT his support.
If we accept (we absolutely have to because of the historical evidence we have) that marriage has mostly been religiously sanctified first and then legally ratified, then one has to wonder why gays want to be married. After all, the same religion which has been an inherent and inseparable part of Western civilization’s definition of marriage and its raison d’être is not very nice to them.
It is very logical and modern to say that any two people who want to be joined in holy matrimony…I mean just regular matrimony, should have the right to do so. And they should be given the same legal or social advantages (and god damn it, the same disadvantages) that marriage brings. I understand this and I agree.
But why would gays want to be part of a tradition that loses 50% of its club members anyway? 50% of marriages end up in divorce and many of the couples stuck in the “successful” marriages are there because they can’t figure a way out. It boggles the mind. My only explanation is that gays want to hold themselves to the exact same low standards straight couples do! I suppose that’s natural human behavior. Or perhaps I’m holding them to a higher standard, expecting them to be better than me.
On top of this you have to listen to the voice of the people. The majority of voters just don’t want same sex marriages to be recognized. This is a hard pill to swallow if you’re on the opposite side of the debate. But reality bites. A small proportion of society cannot and should not enforce its desires on the rest of the population. Fair is fair and gays lost, they just don’t have the support they think they do. And they can call everyone bigots. But the fact is that if they were to force themselves on society (and I’m not saying that’s what they’re doing), then they would be tyrannical dictators. Who’s worse?
Gay rights are human rights. True. But is there a line to be drawn between what we need for the future and institutions we’ve held dear in the past? And should we even try to join institutions that abhor us?
An inherent flaw in any democratic system is that the winners are probably the best liars. Groups that are better at convincing the rest of us to back up their causes win votes. And so, had the gay community had more money to invest in marketing or other campaign strategies, perhaps they would’ve won. But that doesn’t change the fact that under the current paradigm, and more surprising so, during a time when a call for change was heeded by most Americans, 52% of voters agreed to overturn the state Supreme Court decision to legalize same sex marriages.
By the way, I don’t see too many straight groups protesting the results.
Plan of action:
If gays want to get any where with gay marriage they have to leave all religious establishments behind. They shouldn’t be politically nice to them and should descend upon them with fury and without mercy. We’re queer and we’re here and we are unilaterally, completely and forever leaving all church doctrine behind (which basically means all of Christianity and marriage). Enough of this trying to get endorsements from Reverends; what are you doing to me?
I recognize there might be a group of religious gays out there. I have news for them. Based on the Bible, they’re living in sin. They should stop their sinful behavior. Religious gays should let the rest of the movement proceed without the burden of religion and leave the church out of this game. The bad, agnostic gays can always repent later anyway, that’s what the Bible says and it’s a win win strategy.
If I were gay and wanted to obtain my human rights through marriage and wanted to commemorate and legalize my union, I wouldn’t go for “marriage”. Why join a homophobic establishment to begin with? I would develop a new ceremony and celebrate my union with my friends and family without the historical and religious cloud of “marriage”. I would have a candle ceremony or something. I think the gay community should start working on their own traditions. They could call it “garriage” and create ceremonies that include writings by gay authors and make up their own vows.
Once rules of garriage have been established, the community should turn the gay ceremonies into common gay practice. Let the straights be marginalized for once.
Lastly, they should work on getting garriage legally recognized. This shouldn’t be that difficult. It doesn’t involve the constitution. It doesn’t ask for benedictions from the Pope. It doesn’t even interfere with common straight practices or beliefs. Foreign marriages are formally recognized in the USA as are marriages by different faiths. This would be an addition.
The whole thing is embarrassing to witness. No matter which side you’re on.
