About this iReport
  • Not verified by CNN

  • Click to view k3vsDad's profile
    Posted June 26, 2014 by
    Farmersburg, Indiana
    This iReport is part of an assignment:
    Sound off

    More from k3vsDad

    Equality - Where I Stand


    As  court after court has struck down the ban on equality for long-term,  same-gender couples as being unconstitutional, there are some who  believe that my reporting the "news" is somehow my promoting an agenda  and pushing "gay marriage".

    Nothing could be farther from the truth.

    I have made my position on the issue of equality known for a long time and stated it in at least two previous entries at FromTheCornfield.com. At other times I have simply reported on what the courts have ruled.

    Here is what I have published in two previous years:

    Same-gender relationships should be afforded the benefit of state blessing just as opposite-gender relationships now are.

    There is no reason to complicate or not allow equality under the law  with all the benefits and protections afforded opposite- gender couples  over the use of a word on the state license.

    Best option is that all state licenses use the term civil union on all  state documents. Let the couples have a "marriage" privately within the  framework of their religious institutions or according to their moral  view.

    All couples, whether  same-gender or opposite-gender, should be afforded the same rights and  benefits under the law when receiving a license to recognize the joining  of the two individuals legally.

    We must ensure that all our citizens are treated equally under the law.  No one class or group of individuals or couples should be granted any  rights and benefits not afforded to every other group of individuals and  couples.

    That is how I framed my position in two previous reports:

    http://fromthecornfield.com/blog1.php/shaping-the-cornfield- perspective-where January 13, 2013

    http://fromthecornfield.com/blog1.php/the-cornfield-political- platform-or
    September 2, 2012

    To explain further my position, I believe religious sects be allowed to  be the only institutions allowed to perform marriage ceremonies.

    But,  in keeping with the 1st Amendment, those ceremonies should be  considered strictly as religious ceremonies and afforded no legal status  in the civil arena.

    In order for those wed within their place of worship to receive state recognition, a separate civil ceremony must be performed.

    This would eliminate the debate over the words "marry" and "marriage".  That terminology would be relegated as religious in nature and not  civil.

    The idea of separation of church and state would be  upheld and at the same time allow accomodation to those of faith to have  the blessing of the church while keeping state recognition as a  strictly civil matter.

    Of course, my idea is not going to fly.

    The courts are already deciding and ruling in case after case that  there is a "fundamental right" to marry in the Constitution without  regard to the gender of the couples seeking state recognition.

    I  am not pushing for anything more than equal protection and recognition  under the law. The wording is not of any relevance to me.

    It  should be noted that not all in Christendom hold the same view or  interpretation of what the Bible has to say about same- gender couples.  Some denominations such as the United Church of Christ, the Presbyterian  Church (USA) and the Episcopal Church in the US of A are welcoming of  same-gender couples and believe that under the New Testament, grace  recognizes that God created us all as we are.

    Those who do not believe that grace covers all have the right to that perspective and belief.

    As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord in the Light as it has shone upon us.

    From the Cornfield, those who oppose equality for same-gender,  long-term couples have every right to believe and hold fast to their  opposition.

    At the same time, those of us who believe that all  couples should be seen equally under the law also have every right to  believe and hold fast to our conviction.

    Add your Story Add your Story