Day by Day

Monday, March 08, 2004

Thank you Mr. Cross

For writing this:

However, the primary motivation is emotional. Homosexuals are not in favor of 'civil unions' because they know that there is a difference between a civil union and a marriage. A marriage carries with it a connotation of morality (be it practiced by everyone or not) and social acceptance. There is an inherent understanding that marriage is more than just a slip of paper....and because of the understood moral implications of same-sex marriage, homosexual marriage has been prohibited in the large majority of Christian churches. Christian society (ours) believes that the Bible is relatively clear on the subject...and this is what homosexuals want to change.

They want not only to have the same legal rights as a heterosexual couple, they want the same respect in the ethical and moral venues as well. Civil unions don't give same-sex couples that....the emotional comfort of being universally accepted as moral and ethical equals under the eyes of God and man. There is guilt involved, but the guilt is balanced by the desire to continue the behavior people think to be morally wrong. The solution? Change the morality, and make it socially and morally unacceptable NOT to fully accept homosexuality as the norm. Civil unions don't address that, but same-sex marriage does."

And now the City of Seattle is recognizing same-sex marriages from other cities like Portland and San Fran. But right now, I have to sadly say that my opposition to this is pretty damn strong. Not only is judicial activism being shoved down my throat, but I have to wonder just what people really want: Do they want all the legal rights of traditional marriage? To me, the answer is "No". Othewise, they could have simply addressed their grievance through legislative means. But they didn't do that. They found a friendly judge and started screwing around with the law, opening a big can of worms. And the more I sit back and read, the more I'm leaning against gay marriage. As John Cross writes:

As I have said before, the civil union idea is uniformly rejected because there is no conferring of moral and ethical equity on homosexual marriage. THAT is the goal.....the tearing down of the moral and ethical proscriptions that society (Judeo-Christian society) has where homosexuality is concerned. Marriage carries the connotation of sanctity and legitimacy where society is concerned, and civil unions do not. Even if every legal door were opened for homosexual couples, and the term remained 'civil unions', there would still be horror and angst in the same-sex marriage proponents. It wouldn't be as legitimate in moral and ethical territory as a marriage would.

You and I both know that if the Religious Right were attempted to force (through the courts) their version of morality onto the rest of this country, the Left would be up in arms, marching, protesting, rioting, and screaming. And yet when the Left attempts to force THEIR version of morality onto the Religious Right, not a peep is heard. Don't like it? "Oh, you're a BIGOT! You're a HOMOPHOBE!"

The more I sit back and look at the entire situation, the more I'm coming to side firmly with the "anti" groups. And it's not a comfortable feeling. I'm not into organized religion. I haven't been into a church in YEARS. And yet, I'm looking at the people who are attempting to stop this judicial activism brought on by the Left, and it's the same people who I've tried to shun. And that pisses me off.

I don't object to this whole fiasco out of religious reasons. I object to it because I'm against judicial activism! I object to it because I'm against judges legislating from the bench! I object to it because I'm against one group of people attempting to force THEIR OPINION of what's right and wrong on another group of people! Face it, Mr. Cross is right. If the politicians jumped up tomorrow and said "All gay civil unions confer the same legal rights and responsibilities as traditional marriage" the fight would STILL be going on! This isn't about "civil rights" per se, it's about one group forcing their lifestyle onto another group.

So I know where I sit, and for right now I'm watching carefully. I really don't think this is going to end pleasantly.

No comments: