Draginol Draginol

Listening to the arguments on gay marriage

▼

Listening to the arguments on gay marriage

Respecting the rights of the majority

from JoeUser Forums

The United States is premised on the separation of church and state. But over time, what that separation means has changed.  The founding fathers wanted to ensure that people were free to practice whatever religion they wanted. Moreover, they wanted to ensure that the government did not establish any official religion. You will regularly hear the ACLU refer to the "establishment clause" of the US constitution as the basis for their various lawsuits against states.

It's a sticky situation because for such a long while, the percentage of Americans who were Christians were so high that religious concepts made their way into government policy. This wasn't intentional in most cases. If you're a true believer many things that are religious in nature just seem natural, common sense, normal. One such thing is marriage.

In hindsight, it was probably a bad idea for the government to recognize marriage as anything beyond a civil union. But it's easy to understand why this happened. Marriage is such a normal part of human life that how could the government not recognize it?  As an agnostic, it's never bothered me either way. I am comfortable with my beliefs and do not feel threatened by people's religions. In fact, I embrace their beliefs because it helps create a deep tapestry of culture that enriches us all.

I also believe in two social principles: 1) That the traditions of the super-majority should be respected and protected. 2) The rights of the minority should be protected.

I think government should get out of the marriage business entirely. I support the right of any two people to "get married" regardless of sex.  However, the super majority don't think the government should recognize these unions. And by our constitution, that's pretty much that. Marriage isn't a "right". The 10th amendment makes pretty clear that anything not explicitly outlined in the constitution is left to "the people" (in the form of their democratically elected representatives).

That said, gays should have access to civil unions that have the same legal punch as marriage. It may seem like semantics but to millions of Americans, it's not. There is a principle involved here. The same people who argued that the Super Bowl nonsense with Janet Jackson was "no big deal" are likely to not see why people object to gay marriage. The majority of Americans believe in these traditions and they have been with us for literally thousands of years. All around us, however, small minorities seem bent on using the government to infringe on those traditions.  Marriage is a cultural phenomenon, not a religious one. And as long as the majority of Americans practicing it believe it should be between a man and a women exclusively that is what it should be. It's their tradition. Contrary to what some may believe, majorities have rights too.

The government should work to ensure that civil unions have the same legal meaning as marriages. Two consenting adults, regardless of sex, should have the right to form a legal union.  For that matter, I believe that any number of consenting adults should be able to form civil unions (whether you're into "Polyamory" or whatever). But marriage should not be open for redefinition by a small minority of people. And they should not be trying to use the tools of government to hijack it for their own uses.

 

45,669 views 186 replies
Reply #176 from JoeUser Forums Top
Primarily, I want to thank Brad Wardell and everyone else who has thoughtfully contributed their opinions to this forum. True, there may currently be many other national issues with more concrete social/economic implications to be dealt with (with regard to the "making a mountain out of a molehill" comment), but it is hard to deny the emotional response that the topic of same-sex marriages triggers for proponents of either side. This discussion has so far been very interesting and I'm sure it has served many people (including myself) as a source of insight. If there's one thing that I have garnered from the discussion, it is my observation that rhetoric and reason are crafty tools- both can be bent to amply serve any opinion. Gotta love that.

And now, I admittedly offer yet another example of exploited rhetoric: (alas, there just doesn't seem to be any way around it...)

The reasons for my personal opinion on the current topic aside, the one thing on this page that I can wholeheartedly agree with is a statement in Brad Wardell's initial posting. Our country's feelings on Gay marriage do seem to be changing- the majority may sooner rather than later become the minority. If this is the case, so be it- but leave the decision regarding an institution created and established with the support of society up to the PEOPLE of that society.

As long as the right for ALL citizens to marry an individual of the opposite gender is equally protected under law (and it is), and as long as ALL citizens have the opportunity to enjoy the equal personal/economic benefits of a partnership aknowledged by the government (Civil Unions prove viable);
Then, as long as these conditions exist, may THE PEOPLE (through the legislature), rather than the members of an activist judiciary, decide when and how to alter a long-established civil convention.

As hard as it may be, we, as Americans, must continually strive to exemplify a Democratic Republic.
Democracy still works.
Reply #177 from JoeUser Forums Top
marriage is a promise of love and respect and loyalty.
between 2 people who love and honour each other ..simple really.
Why do people feel threatened by gay marriage?
Does it REALLY effect you?
Marriage effects the people involved.
It wasn't that long ago that these attitudes were expressed about inter racial-marriages.
Life is too short. Everyone deserves the right to be happy ...will this really cause you unhappiness?
What gives anyone the right to judge?
Or are we all so perfect ..we know what is best?

Jess
Offworld Trading Company
Reply #178 from JoeUser Forums Top
The history repeats itself; Freeing slaves was an outragregeous act once. Now people look at those times say vow! did that really happen? Slavery? people were slaves? vow!! In 100 years later we will look at back now and say 'gay weren't allowed to marry can you believe it'? Soon or later it is going to happen. you like it or not.

This country is very interesting; In work place or in a social environment everybody seems so open to liberal ideas like accepting gays among them. No discrimination or anything like that. Everybody is so cool about it. But once something like this becomes official. Boom. Those cool people suddenly find the most idiotic reasons to justify what is right and what is wrong. It is not about what's best? It is about what YOU think it is best. But it aint helping. I see thru the words. You cannot hide behind these lame excuses. Sorry buddy you have to be really creative to hide that fear and dicriminating nature of yours. It is getting harder and harder to keep that down. This puridish society is trembling. And the majority like yourself is getting a slap on the face.

After the cold war, the US was the strongest nation in the world. It still is. But knowing that created summer love; We live in the greatest nation; Let's have fun; no war let's shag... and the ignorance is born; The new society have know idea about what's happening in the world except that they live in the greatest place on earth. We live in the greatest nation. Everything is taken care for us. We don't even need to think much. Our nation is best. Our government takes care of us. That's is the majority you are talking about. majority? Majority? Is that what you came up with? Everything came to US from Europe. And it is still coming. First settlers. fashion. ideas. now gay marriage. Majority? Majority of this society is followers. They don't make decisions. They follow. And if something is wrong. They complain. That's your majority.
Reply #179 from JoeUser Forums Top

Some people apparently forget that women got the right to vote and slavery abolished through the democratic process -- not through the courts.

If gay marriage is something that American society thinks is acceptable then they will express that opinion through their ELECTED representatives.

Reply #184 from JoeUser Forums Top
Chris polls? No one normal ever takes those polls! Except for bleeding hearts like your self who have nothing beter to do than cause termoil all day.
Reply #185 from JoeUser Forums Top
I am amazed at all the comparisons between the "gay rights" movement and the freeing of the slaves or the civil rights movement. I do not believe that two people who deny civil union as aposed to maggiage are on the same drasticly opressed footing as slaves!

Sepret but equal... Stop being so dramatic!
Reply #186 from JoeUser Forums Top
There is no such thing as seperate but equal when using it in relation to civil rights. That was tried once, read your history book, it didn't work then and it wont work now. (No, I'm not saying being denied marriage is the same thing as being held as a slave. I'm only stating that in any situation related to the civil rights of any group seperate but equal doesn't exist. If the group being "seperated" is equal then they wouldn't need to be "seperated.")

~Melchiah