Gays Attempting to Redefine Marriage By Nullifying State’s Involvement
In this issue of Stupid Things People Say About Gays, I’m going to focus a little more on the “Gay Marriage” issue which has obtained wide news coverage over the past couple of weeks.
Focus on Families, a purportedly Christian organization, has released arguments against Gay Marriage and publishes them on their website. The following Argument is taken directly from that site:
An even greater objective of the homosexual movement is to end the state’s compelling interest in marital relationships altogether. After marriages have been redefined, divorces will be obtained instantly, will not involve a court, and will take on the status of a driver’s license or a hunting permit. With the family out of the way, all rights and privileges of marriage will accrue to gay and lesbian partners without the legal entanglements and commitments heretofore associated with it.
This is obviously an argument of the desperate which has no fact basis whatsoever. Last I checked, Gay Marriage did not seek to overthrow heterosexual marriage. Certainly their have been many jokes thrown about stating that if gays can’t get married, heterosexuals should not be allowed to and thus the law would be equal to all parties. Regrettably, the consequences would be all encompassing – loss of jobs resulting from no Family Court system, no “wedding planners”, less use of the local VFW hall for receptions, etc… etc…
What Focus on the Family has missed in their argument is that gays are asking for the right to GET married, not the right to dismantle marriage. They also don’t realize that this argument completely voids the argument that marriage is not a civil issue. They clearly state that the state has a, “compelling interest in marital relationships altogether.” That compelling interest is exactly why all committed couples should be given the equal status of “married” by the state.
We’ve also heard a lot of comments about “redefining marriage.” Although I can’t argue that marriage will in some ways require redefining, I do deny that any such redefinition would degrade heterosexual marriage. This argument is a scare tactic used to propagate homophobia in the most grotesque sense – vaguely. “You are trying to redefine marriage!!!!” Legal definitions have changed tremendously throughout history. Our founders smartly wrote the Constitution and Declaration of Independence so that laws could morph into a working, united, equal system. If legal definitions did not evolve and change, the words “negro” and “colored” would still be used to define “African Americans” by law and the word “property” would still refer to African Americans. Personally, I’m thrilled that such words are re-definable. We the homos of the world should not let such vague allegations serve to threaten us, but embrace them – “Yes, we do want to redefine marriage, just like they redefined property.”
I can’t even fathom the accusation that divorces “will take on the status” of driver’s licenses or hunting licenses. Is their anything intelligible in that false, completely unfounded accusation? That allegation makes it sound as though gay people are looking to have a drive-thru wedding chapel/divorce court (which drive-thru wedding chapels already exist in Vegas without the help of gays). Heterosexuals are doing a fine job of destroying the institution of marriage themselves. Adding countless, loving people into the category of married will not harm, but strengthen that institution.