 |
Category: News and Politics
Call me crazy but this issue has really pissed me off. Let's forget that these people who married are gay. The basic argument against gay marriage is that marriage has always been between a man and a woman and that it is a religious institution.
Bullshit.
Marriage from it's earliest inception in history (or even Biblically) was one of ownership, inheritance, and alliances. Intimate love was irrelevant to the institution for the vast bulk of history and for that matter even in much of the world today. A man would often barter for a woman or make political concessions for one in much the same way as they would acquire either livestock or a slave for their business. In much of the world and much of history two people couldn't marry if they were of different races or different religions. In some cases even partners of different nationalities or families were anathema to the institution not to mention if the intended spouses fathers did not approve and bargain the transaction. The prevailing culture and government would not recognize it and would not afford what rights or recognitions were accorded to other marriages in those societies.
Think about that for a minute. If you are married or know people who are or if your parents are/were married, think about it. Would those marriages have stood up to the scrutiny of other cultures or of past ages? Marriage is far, far away from a static rigid institution. It has evolved over time to what we now know and it will continue to do so regardless of what people believe today. I know of no marriage (especially in this country) that is what marriage used to be. People may say no to gay marriage but just as in the past marriage will change and grow just as every other dynamic in the human paradigm grows and evolves. It is practically unheard of that such a thing can remain static in a dynamic and growing world.
As for it being a religious institution, again, bullshit. That idea comes from a time when church and state were the same. You couldn't have one without the other. These days a couple may or may not have a sense of spirituality in their marriage. In the past you had to have religious trappings to legitimize it. Today it may or may not have religious trappings.
But they have always and still do have had to have governmental recognition or society itself doesn't recognize it. If this was purely a religious issue then we could say it's up to the individual religion to make the call while civil marriages would be universal. Or we could say only that only marriages performed by a govt official counted, but then that would really piss people off since god forbid (irony intended) it would take away someone's rights.
This is a moronic issue. Eventually gay marriages will happen. People can say "not in my lifetime" all they want just as people have for past marital evolutions. In the end this is not an issue that effects anyone directly but those who wish to marry. You will never be able to stop those who want something and have a direct vested interest in achieving it versus those who simply don't like the idea but are never to be directly involved. Ever.
Powered by  | | English | | Albanian | | Arabic | | Bulgarian | | Catalan | | Chinese | | Croatian | | Czech | | Danish | | Dutch | | Estonian | | Filipino | | Finnish | | French | | Galician | | German | | Greek | | Hebrew | | Hindi | | Hungarian | | Indonesian | | Italian | | Japanese | | Korean | | Latvian | | Lithuanian | | Maltese | | Norwegian | | Polish | | Portuguese | | Romanian | | Russian | | Serbian | | Slovak | | Slovenian | | Spanish | | Swedish | | Thai | | Turkish | | Ukrainian | | Vietnamese |
|