In the spirit of “I’m done playing political games“, this is a serious question:
Who cares what kind of relationship anyone else is in?
I’ve been arguing this since 1998 (Here Comes the Groom, Here Comes the Groom (Reprised)), and honestly, folks, I don’t understand why this is still an issue. (While this is phrased mostly about “gay marriage”, it also applies to poly groups and other alternative relationships.) Here’s the objections I usually hear:
* It will have an economic impact because there’s more married couples: This is the only argument that makes sense – but if that’s a bad thing, then why are there government (and private) initiatives to promote marriage?
* My religion says…: That’s nice. So people who are part of your faith don’t participate in marriage equality. For once, Catholicism is way ahead of the pack – because the Catholic Church doesn’t automatically recognize a civil ceremony between two Catholics. Getting married in the Church is a separate thing than a legal marriage. Reform and change within any church is a separate matter than civil, legal issues.
* But my religion says it’s a sin, so we should stop others from doing it: Go find yourself a theocracy; you’re in the wrong country. Your religious beliefs bind you, not a single person more.
* But it’s gross: Really? There are so many straight people in relationships who I really, really don’t want to imagine “doing it” that it’s not funny. Most of them probably think the same of me.
* Traditional marriage is…: There is no such solid institution. Seriously, do some historical research. It doesn’t exist. For example, the so-called “mail order brides” of the USAian frontier don’t look anything like our modern courtship rituals. Arranged marriages were the norm for most of human history. The idea of romantic love being a part of marriage is a relatively new concept. And, um, when you’re talking about Biblical tradition, you’ve got to account for multiple wives (Moses), forcing a rape victim to marry her rapist (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT), and being forced to marry your older brother’s widow (Judah, Onan, and Tamar). Not saying any of them are right; I am saying that “tradition” isn’t a compelling argument here.
*But then [insert form of marriage here] is possible: And if it’s between consenting adults, who cares? (Both “adult” and “legal consent” are sufficiently well defined that I’m not going to do it again here.)
* But marriage is for producing children: Are you saying that it should be illegal for infertile people to marry? Because if so, fuck you. Seriously. Just go the hell away.
* But marriage is for raising children: And? What’s the problem here?
* The kids will be teased/it will be harder for them: So we should discriminate against people because some other people will discriminate against them? How does that logic work?
* Raising kids requires a man and a woman: There is no research to back this up. And considering the number of completely messed-up kids raised by straight couples, I’m really not convinced. I think a kid raised by an average gay couple would be much better off than a kid raised by two straight people in a dysfunctional relationship (let alone dysfunctional straight people in any relationship).
* Kids raised by gay parents will be gay as well: Which is why homosexuals only come from homosexual parents… oh, wait. Not true. Whoops.
So I don’t get it. I don’t understand why this is a governmental issue. I don’t understand why it’s a political issue. Someone explain to me why they believe it is good for our country to fight against marriage equality.
Otherwise, I’m going to start presuming that people fighting marriage equality are fighting against the well-being of our country.
Go. Comments are open.
(Note: While comments are open, I secretly made a copy of John Scalzi’s Mallet of Loving Correction, and may use it. You’ve got your space, I’ve got mine. Specious hate will be malleted, and moderation is turned on, so you might see a delay in your comment being posted.)