Gay Marriage: My Goodness It’s a Debate on Momversation

08.30.10

I know many of you are passionate about this, both ways. I’d love to hear where you stand.

  • http://wwwjackbenimble.blogspot.com/ Jack

    My dream for those opposed to gay marriage is simple. I want you to have gay children who grow up to lead very healthy and productive lives. And then I want you to look them in the eye and say that they cannot get married because you don’t think it is right.

    I want you to use your twisted logic and misunderstanding of law to explain that they aren’t really being discriminated against.

    In the interim I’d love to get inside your bedrooms. Let’s find out who engages in sodomy, who commits adultery and all the other biblically forbidden actions. And then you can look us in the eye and tell us that you have the right to tell others how to live.

    Love,

    Jack (your favorite lesbian who just happens to be trapped in a man’s body.)

    • casey

      I would have no problem looking my kid in the eye and saying I believe the term “marriage” should be used for male and female unions only gay or not. Retaining the term marriage for male and female unions doesn’t tell someone “how to live”. It just defines the term.

      • http://www.onenerveleft.com LizzB

        Why?

        Is this because you define marriage as a religious ceremony? If so, that’s fine. I do not expect churches to have to allow gay marriages by law. HOWEVER, if you believe marriages only happen as a religious ceremony between a man and a woman, then my husband and I are not “married” by your logic. We were married by a justice of the peace.

        If this is not the reason that you define marriage as such, then you are still classifying a same sex union as something NOT EQUAL to marriage by requiring it to be called something different than marriage.

        So which is it? Alienating hetero marriages that were not “before the eyes of god”. OR alienating same sex marriages by demanding that they are called something different.

        • http://greeninoc.blogspot.com greenInOC

          @LizzB I for one DO expect churches to marry gay couples and if they don’t want to obey the law (hopefully soon it will be law and we can put an end to this nonsense)?

          Well then, the church can give up it’s non-profit status. It’s a choice. It’s simple.

          Put their money where their mouths are so to speak.

          From the pulpit we often hear that we need to embrace the opportunity of giving money to the church, to give when we think we can’t give any more, make sacrifices to tithe regularly, etc… Well, this will give churches as institutions to set an example and embrace the opportunity to sacrifice – if that’s what they believe.

          • http://www.onenerveleft.com @LizzB

            Letting government have influence over religion and its fundamental beliefs and tradition is a BAAAAD idea. Not to mention the fact that it impedes on one of the reasons this country was founded.

            Already, religion is far too often interjected into government and well, look where that has led us.

      • http://wwwjackbenimble.blogspot.com Jack

        Casey- that is illogical and meaningless. You have to do better than that.

    • http://www.BLOGitse.com BLOGitse

      Well written!
      I agree with you…

  • http://deskfullofclutter.blogspot.com sam

    I hid in the closet for a long time and even got married and started a family. I have two amazing sons and a best friend to whom I’m still legally married, though at some point we’re going to have to get around to taking care of that part. Right now it’s something we laugh about and often ask each other if we’re gay married.

    We were married in a Methodist church, the church her grandmother attends, a church my “wife” attended occasionally as a child, and a church I first stepped into for our first marriage counseling session. I was raised Baptist, though by this point I was even more atheist than I am now.

    The preacher in this church agreed to marry us without any real reason to believe that either of us cared at all about church or god or religion or Methodist theology. In all honesty, the closest I’d ever been to Methodist before was our Sunday afternoon trips to the bloodmobile down the street from our church. Incidentally, because I’ve had sex with any man one time I’m legally disallowed from donating blood. Perhaps he agreed to marry us because he understood that she was pregnant, and we needed to get to consecratin’ so our eternal souls wouldn’t burn.

    And now our marriage is essentially at an end. Because we haven’t severed the civil bonds we are still married. Any right available to a married couple are still open to us. We are also still both parents to those boys I mentioned. I also coach soccer for them, fwiw, something else gay people are capable of. I love their mother, and sometimes I wish I could have been the husband that she needed me to be, but she also can’t really be the partner that I need her to be, at least not in this particular way.

    Eventually I expect we’ll both find someone. And when she does, she’ll be able to get married. And if I do, I’ll be able to get

  • http://www.BLOGitse.com BLOGitse

    Is it imagination of gay sex what makes people to think marriage is not for them?
    Do we know what’s happening in our neighbor’s hetero bedroom?
    If two adults love each others what’s the problem? It’s THEIR business, married or not, not ours!
    I know a lot of gay people, gay families – their daily life is as normal as mine…

  • http://www.MarVistaMom.com Sarah Auerswald

    I’m with CoolMom — I just don’t think it’s an issue at all. Not to me. Everyone should be able to get married — and divorced — or not get married at all — and it shouldn’t have anything to do with their sexual orientation.

  • http://www.absenceofalternatives.com subWOW

    The separation of Church and State has to be vigilantly guarded and preserved. I don’t see this as a religious issue. In the gay marriage “debate”, it is the LEGAL rights that are being fought for/against. The right to be able to say “Yes we are married” without the “*”. Any church as a private organization can continue to refuse to bless a gay marriage for all I care since as far as I know KKK is still legally allowed to recruit members and hold meetings as private organizations. That’s just how this country works.

    • http://greeninoc.blogspot.com greenInOC

      @subWOW – from what I can tell, the KKK is legally allowed to recruit members and hold meetings as private organizations. However, they are NOT a non-profit, meaning that they do not have to abide by the laws the government requires of non-profits.

      If a gay couple asked the KKK to marry them, they KKK could do so.

      If a gay couple asked a church with non-profit status to marry them and the church refused (assuming that gay marriage will finally become legal), the church would be breaking the law.

      If a church really truly believes it’s “wrong” then, they will without hesitation give up their non-profit (read: mucho money) status!

      • http://greeninoc.blogspot.com greenInOC

        that should read: “If a gay couple asked the KKK to marry them and the KKK refused they would be within their legal rights.”

      • http://deskfullofclutter.blogspot.com sam

        Churches are currently allowed to decide for themselves who they will and won’t marry. They will continue to have that freedom.

  • http://phdinparenting.com Annie @ PhD in Parenting

    I think the government should get out of the business of marriage altogether. If people want to enter into a contract to protect their rights in the event that their relationship splits up, then they should do so. But the state should allow that type of contract for any people who choose to share their lives in any way.

    If religious institutions want to have a ritual called marriage, then go ahead.

    But anything that impacts people’s legal rights or human rights should be equally available to all people.

  • Jenn

    As a different opinion on this blog, I am a woman who is happily married to another woman, and have been for the past 4 years. We married in Toronto. At home, however, our relationship is not recognized…and we have stacks of paper we carry (one in the car, one in the safe in the house, one at the bank) so that “if” something happens…we have medical power of attorney, wills, etc…it’s really unbelievable.
    You know, if you walked down the street, you’d never be able to pick us out – but we’re the people most overlook. We’re Christians, we go to church, we have good jobs, we contribute to the economy (not that we’ll get each other’s social security), we own a home, we’re good neighbors, and we are godparents to a beautiful niece.
    We found it important to marry because of ‘our’ family values. We wanted to make a commitment to the person we love more than life itself. We wanted to do it in a church, in front of family, and before God.
    I think it’s shameful how religion has been used to villify us. In truth, we’re just your normal couple next door.

  • Michelle

    As someone who understand the logic of both sides of the argument, I want to say this:

    The absolute BEST piece I have ever read in support of gay rights was not even intended for that purpose: Chapter 3 of Elizabeth Gilbert’s book “Committed.” This chapter thoughtfully lays out the evolution of the concept of marriage throughout time and across cultures and clearly illustrates how in the span of history, the concept of marriage as a man and a woman is a only a recent phenomenon and just another adaptation of the concept to fit society’s current needs.

    Seriously. Go. Read it. It will break down every logical argument you’ve ever heard about the sanctity and history of marriage. And again, I point out, she authors the book with no intent to express a view on gay marriage.