Solving Inequalities

This topic, suggested by my sister, is the ethical and constitutional problems with equal marriage rights in politics and the government.  In layman's terms, how can politicians publicly gay-bash and still get taken seriously?  Why don't their followers care that they're hurting real people?  Should this be allowed in politics?  Should it be an issue in the government?

non-heteronormative people < people who believe their God should be able to run this country


                                   ...there's a problem here.  That 'less than' should be an equal sign.


But it isn't.  And here's why:

Commercial featuring fear-mongering, borderline racism, and fake concern for children!

Thrown out, but the mentality survives and grows.

WHAT.

Gays and lesbians will make us lose wars, apparently. Also, the cake is a lie.

This guy is a whack job, but unfortunately an influential one.

Let me first say that I have read the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence and all 27 amendments.  I've conducted interviews, gone through the actual laws passed banning same-sex marriage, read through the trials which finally nixed Prop 8 for good, listened as politicians and conservative news shows bashed me by proxy, and dealt with the fallout of coming out to my family.  I'm not just some uninformed kid whining about how so-and-so hurt her feelings, okay?  I'm a twenty-five-year-old woman who knows what she's talking about.


I'm talking about equality.  Well, actually, I'm talking about inequality, but in this case that's just semantics.

There is nothing anywhere in the Constitution which defines marriage.  Marriage wasn't defined as 'one man and one woman' until 1996.  They say that they don't want marriage redefined, but isn't that exactly what they did?  What they really mean is that they want an excuse to keep discriminating against me and people like me.  If their proposed definitions are ruled unconstitutional, they are the victims; we are somehow infringing on their rights.

This.  Is.  Not.  Okay.  Guess what?  We don't want extra rights.  We don't want to corrupt your children.  We don't want to shove our feelings down your throat, invade your homes, or take over the world.  

Surprise!  We just want due process.


Here's what my interviewees had to say (with one exception, I kept my orientation secret so they wouldn't worry about offending me):


"I'm all for marriage between a man and a wife; I think it should only be between a man and a woman.  But the government should be equal.  It's just fair, and things need to be equal."  --a returned Mormon missionary at Utah State University


"It doesn't matter to me; I don't care if you live together, get married, own things together, buy a house together.  It's none of my business." --a mother with a gay daughter


"I have mixed feelings, but the government should stay out of it.  Who am I to say they can't kiss or get married...know what I mean?  I mean, I know this is not gay marriage but if people have lived together for years they can be married without even getting married, like insurance, benefits, stuff like that...why isn't that offensive to the institution of marriage and two guys getting married is?" --a non-denominational Christian classmate


"On a technical scale, there's nothing in the Constitution about it.  Government shouldn't get involved.  But I don't think it's right; I'm Mormon, I just got back from my mission, I voted for Prop 8.  But religion aside, I have no problem with gay people, I just disagree with gay marriage.  And getting married without getting married...sharing a last name, sharing insurance, that kind of thing...they shouldn't do that either.  It's like piracy, only with marriage contracts.  The government shouldn't be involved, but if it's left up to the People, my personal opinion is no."  --a good friend of mine (we're still friends even after I told him I'm gay)


I wasn't able to get a quote from my last interviewee (a father in his 40s), because I wasn't in a position to write things down, but I'll sum it up:


It has to be an issue in the government, because marriage is a government-sanctioned action.  It has to be in politics, because people vote for those who share the same values.  Marriage has been, for thousands of years, only for raising children.  Marriage promotes family households.  Gays have no reason to get married; insurance benefits and tax breaks are set up for families.  Marriage already has a definition; we shouldn't redefine it just for 5% of the population.  Why change things for that 5% when it's worked up until now?

*note: some of this information is not correct.  same-sex couples can raise children.  it is, however, his opinion, which is what I asked for.


Hmm.  The results of this experiment have proved my hypothesis: young adults are more accepting than...old adults.  (Can I call them that without being insulting?)   Even though the older generation still holds to their bizarre ideals, the younger generation is starting to realize the truth: we're people, and the Declaration of Independence tells us we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

 I know that there are some kids so indoctrinated that they repeat everything their parents say without forming their own opinions.  And I know that there are some old adults who support marriage equality.  And it's okay to have opinions which don't match mine.  (That's what's nice about this country; we have the right to think and say whatever we want.  But this is my blog, my opinions, and my collection of information.)

So answer me this, elder Americans: why shouldn't we have the floor now?  We're just as intelligent, thoughtful, and principled as you are; it's just that your principles are going out of style as we come to understand that people who are different are still people, no matter what our parents think.  We need to have a say in our future; after all, you're going to die much sooner than we are.  No offense.  It's just a fact.


One more fact: the first amendment to the Constitution says that nobody can make a law respecting an establishment of religion, nobody can impede free exercise of religion, nobody can abridge the freedom of speech, nobody can infringe on the freedom of the press, nobody can interfere with the right to peaceably assemble, and nobody can prohibit a petition for a governmental redress of grievances.


Examples of this can be found in Arkansas, Michigan, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio and Oregon; in these states, churches and conservatives drafted petitions to ban same-sex marriage and they got their way.  They exercised their first amendment rights in petitioning the government, openly using their religion as an excuse to discriminate against a minority group, and publicly hating on said minority group.

I exercise my right to free speech when I call them douchebags who use religion as a weapon.  If this were the 13th century, they'd be killing us.

Questions?  Comments?  Concerns?  Aggressive defense of conservative social politics?  Suggestions for future topics?  I didn't start this blog just to publish my opinions; I want to hear what you think.  I'm all eyes and ears.