This post is in response to a couple of comments on my last post about gay marriage. I thought I would write it here instead of leaving a longish comment.
I don't really understand the extreme, and sometime violent, reaction to gay marriage. This is an activity, or maybe better, a group of activities or life style, that has very little impact on people other than the two involved in it at the time.
The most common reason for objecting to gay marriage seems to be religious. But the religious argument does not make a lot of sense to me either. I am fine with organize religion opposing gay marriage. That is not where my questions lay.
I am puzzled by the people's reaction, not the religions' reaction. There are many things that religion opposes, but people choose to ignore. And if they don't ignore it, they certainly don't react to it with the viciousness that they do toward gay marriage. For example, divorce, adultery, hate, etc. There are a multitude of behaviors that religion frowns upon, that people engage in all the time without provoking general hatred and proposed constitutional amendments to ban.
So what is the problem? Repressed "gayhood"? Maybe we protest the strongest against that which we fear in ourselves the most.
To give it a political spin, republicans are by far the most vocal against gay marriage. Yet it is mostly republicans that have had to deal with gay scandals.
It is conservative, evangelical religious leaders that are by far the most vocal against gay marriage. Yet it is mostly conservative, evangelical religious leaders that have had to deal with gay scandals.
What does that tell you?
Coming back to the California constitutional amendment to define marriage as only between one man and one woman, it seems that their biggest argument for the passage of the amendment is to prevent the teaching of gay marriage in the schools. That is a very weak argument and it means that they have no real basis other than their own fears of who and what they are.
I feel sorry for them. It must be very depressing to have so much self-doubt.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Jerry, while I thoroughly enjoy the schadenfreude that comes from right-wing gay scandals, I think you may be trying to make too much soup out of that rock.
ReplyDeleteFor me, the issue of gay marriage falls into two constituencies - religious and civil.
A religion doesn't want to "approve" gay marriage? Fine. They're private institutions, and I think trying to legislate their beliefs on this matter is unconstitutional.
But from a civil perspective, I believe marriage should marriage, regardless of gender. Because religious arguments have no place in a civil matter. None.
janiece,
ReplyDeleteWe are in agreement.
I am trying to figure out why people react so violently to gay marriage. I understand the religious argument, but they cannot make that argument for a constitutional amendment. It has to be a civil argument. It seems the best they can do with a civil argument is teaching gay marriage in schools. I see no harm in teaching about ALL marriage in school.