- Posted June 17, 2008 by
This iReport is part of an assignment:
Same-sex marriage: Civil right vs. states' rights
California! Bring Me Your Daughter
No one has an exclusive right to the blessings and joy of a committed loving relationship. That is something all men and women have a right to. I have read over and over that the traditional definition of marriage is between one man and one woman. I have also read repeatedly that anything deviating from this is an abomination in the eyes of God. If that were the case please explain to me how Israel (a prophet of God in the Old Testament) remained a prophet and enjoyed the marriage of multiple wives.The twelve tribes came from at least 5 different wives. A prophet who committed an "abomination" such as polygamy (under Proposition 8's definition) would cease to be a prophet would they not? King David (another Bible Prophet) not only had multiple wives but concubines as well (traditional form of prostitution). I even read a story in the Bible recently of two daughters having sex with their father in order to bear his children. All of these men were prophets of God. This erroneous concept of a one man/one woman marriage would invalidate their marriages as well as the veracity of the Bible would it not? Marriage was historically a union of families for political, financial, and social advancement. The concept of marriage based on romantic love is a very new concept on the grand scale.
But why stop at defining who can enter into Marriage. Traditional views of marriage also ban divorce. Should not the definition in Prop 8 include a ban on this breach of contract. The commitment made in the "Traditional" ceremony is "for better or for worse". That means no matter how bad it gets. It also "Traditionally" includes "till death do us part". So by definition one of the partners should have to die in order to be released from the contract. Those who support writing this discrimination into the constitution should not get to pick and choose which parts of the definition of "Traditional" marriage they want to follow. Its your decision that its "one" man and "one" woman. Therefore no remarriage. The Bible that you have so often quoted says that to remarry is to commit adultery.
What would be your answer to homosexuality? That every man and woman with same sex attraction deny those feelings, turn "straight", and get married to someone of the opposite sex. Well then why not offer up your daughter to me. As a gay man I promise that I will love her with half of my heart. (The other half will be yearning for someone else). I will always honor her, (So much so that I will never defile her by making love to her so she will likely never know the joy of motherhood). I will cherish her (Like I do a fine wine, I will put her away on a shelf and rarely even look at her). Oh sure we will be friends and all but I will never really love her. Is this the life you want for you daughter or your son?
People love to say that gay men and women are promiscuous. By denying gays the opportunity to enter into a committed relationship you are in essence promoting, no, requiring that they have sex outside of wedlock. Oh sure gays could choose to just never have sex, ever. But how dare you impose such a strict and isolating requirement on someone else without being willing to make the same sacrifice.
Gay men and women do not want to tear apart your religious beliefs by forcing your church change its doctrine, but realize that we have religious beliefs and moral standards of our own. By denying us our civil rights, yes civil rights, you are infringing on our religious freedoms. This argument goes well beyond just marriage. It is a matter of denying a certain group, who happens to be a minority, basic fundamental rights. In the end the heterosexual majority has wanted to deny the fact that homosexuality is not a choice and that God actually made people this way on purpose. Its OK to be wrong. You were wrong about women having an equal role in society (we fought long and hard to end woman suffrage), you were wrong about blacks having an equal role in society (both in slavery and segregation), you were wrong about those with disabilities or different abilities having an equal role in society, and you ARE wrong about denying gay men and women an equal role in our society. (some of whom are your very own sons and daughters).
It is truly a shame that Americans who have fought so long and hard to build up this democratic society on the foundations that all men are created equal would self sabotage their own progress by writing discrimination and bigotry into the constitutions of their respective states. "With liberty and justice for all" means "everyone" not just those who agree with your religious ideologies.