I, for one, fully support it. I know a few gay people who’ve been together much longer then a lot of straight couples and I really can’t understand why any one is against it.
Last night, I ended up in a discussion with a woman who is horrified at the thought of same sex marriage. She listed all these problems she had, but it all sounded like it was something she was simply repeating. None of the arguments made any sense to me. She couldn’t explain her reasoning.
I’m going to list the problems she had. Just so I can try to understand her point of view, can anyone explain them ?
It’s going to destroy marriage.
It’s not good for children.
The bible says so.
Marriage is to produce children.
Like I said before, none of this makes sense to me. What is she thinking ?
Part of it is the feeling that society is changing all too much and all too fast (though few would put it in those terms). People are uncertain about the future, and are thus reluctant to change – even so far as to want to return to the (idealized) past.
Most arguments boil down this way: it’s a change. Since lots of people are still uncomfortable with the idea of gay sex, it’s a particularly difficult one for them to accept. The arguments are just rationalizations of their general dislike and their feeling that this is too much of a change.
What kills me is that their “discomfort” with gay sex usually boils down to the idea that anal intercourse is disgusting because there’s crap up in there. Well, that applies to gays and straights equally (get it? equal rights? ) When did you ever hear a homophobe also talk about their “discomfort” with heterosexual anal intercourse? How often do you hear the term “tits and ass”? Like what good is that “ass” in “tits and ass” if you aren’t going to do something with it? I mean, good hygiene is important for sexual relations no matter what/who we are talking about.
Anyway, the point is that people have been conditioned to hate certain things. Gays and lesbians have been demonized, and so often, people hate them for reasons which they can’t articulate, because they don’t really HAVE any reasons. It’s just a reflex. That’s why it’s good to be visible and not keep your mouth shut.
dragongirl, you seem to have captured the main arguments against extending marriage to homosexual couples. In all I’ve seen on this board and elsewhere, I’ve yet to hear anything but variations on these themes.
Digging down in mechanics of the arguments - how will gay marriage harm marriage in general; how does it harm children; etc., quickly devolves into a generalized sense of inarticulatable discomfort.
And that’s the unifying theme - discomfort. The majority of people are “okay” with gays, as long as they keep it out of sight. The act of society institutionalizing gay relationships will force people to really examine their own feelings about it. They’ll be forced to examine their own prejudices and fears, which is something a lot of folks spend their lives trying to avoid.
I don’t think religious conviction plays a big part, actually. I think the majority of people who claim religious reasons for opposing it are simply relying on the authority of their religious leaders to buttress their own emotional misgivings about gay sex. Appealing to the ultimate authority - God - absolves the individual of the necessity for being able to articulate their own reasoning, which would require examining their own fears etc. – and back to the beginning.
Unlike these people, I can see that while I’d say “Ewwwww!” at the thought of sex with another woman, it doesn’t matter because all that means is that I would not do so. It does not mean there’s anything wrong with it if other people want to. It simply means that I would decline to participate.
I also could not believe in a God that had problems with people loving each other, even if they happen to be the same gender.
Assuming everybody is of age and consenting, I have no argument with what people do and who they choose to do it with.
In my family I seem to be alone in my support for gay marriage. My parents, who are intelligent, live-and-let-live types, have voiced four basic arguments against it.
Ewwwww! Gross! (Yes, mom and dad, but I feel quite sure that a lot of gay people would say the same thing about what goes on in your bedroom)
It demeans the dignity of the institution of marriage. (So do domestic violence, adultery and divorce. It seems to me that straight people have been demeaning the dignity of marriage just fine on their own)
It can’t possibly be a healthy environment for children. (Yes, we all know how unhealthy loving family envirnments are, don’t we?)
If you give “queeries” the right to marry, then you’ll have to give it to the polygamists and the pedophiles and the people who are too fond of animals. (Funny, that’s what they said when the laws against miscegenation were repealed)
I guess the strongest argument of all (not that I lend it any real credence) is that so many people just have the “gut instinct” that gay marriage is “wrong”. You can argue a lot of things out with logic and real world examples, but trying to get people to ignore their gut instincts is a major challenge.
I think the “ick factor” is the primary drive for most opponents, just like the “bambi factor” drives the vast majority of so-called animal “rights” support.
Never underestimate the power of the “ick factor”. It is far easier to get people to accept the outright vile than to get them to accept the merely icky.
I am white, and it didn’t hurt me when black people got equal rights under the law. I am a man, and it didn’t hurt me when women got equal rights under the law. I am married to a white woman, and it doesn’t hurt us that whites can legally marry blacks. I am a man married to the same woman for almost 25 years, and I don’t see any hazard in letting people marry their same-sex honeys.
I can’t imagine anyone deciding that marriage is destroyed, now that gays can do it. So what, if some guy on my block marries his boyfriend?
Roy Blount, Jr. noted that some people said they were uncomfortable thinking about gay couples in bed. He said on that basis, you wouldn’t want your parents to be married.
Like any non-life or death issue, in virtually any group of people (or any group of virtual people!) you will find a bell curve of attitudes. Some will strongly support, some will strongly oppose and most will be somewhere in between. The most common denominators on either end of the bell curve are:
Power/Control (real or perceived gain vs. loss)
Change (need for vs. fear of)
General world outlook (conservative vs. liberal)
I don’t understand why people are surprised that gay marriage is a controversial issue. It strikes all three of the common denominators pretty hard. I myself am torn on this issue. On the one hand I feel strongly that marriage is to be between one man and one woman. This is in large part due to my overall conservative world view and religious beliefs. OTOH, I cannot think of a compelling reason why any goverment should regulate the issue. This puts me in the uncomfortable position of supporting legally what I oppose morally. I hope you can understand that, while sometimes necessary, it’s rarely an easy position to take.
Good job on making that distinction, Doctor Jackson. I’m okay with people who think it’s wrong. I wish more of them could understand that that has nothing to do with whether or not it should be legal.
I’m not gay, and I hope it doesn’t offend anyone when I say that I’m pleased to be living in such exciting times. I missed out on the giving of equal rights to blacks and women (for the most part). I’m looking forward to saying to the grandkids, “Hey, when I was born, only women could get married to men!”, and having them be amazed.
(And yes, I do see it as a foregone conclusion that gays will get the right to marry.)
What people mean when they say that SSM will destroy marriage is “There goes the neighborhood.” If you have to let inferior people into your country club, then it’s no fun being in the club anymore.
However, most public figures can’t put it quite that way. It is fashionable to pretend that gays and lesbians are full-fledged human beings with the right to pursue their lives as they see fit, as long as they are completely invisible about it.
Yes, you’re right, cher, that describes a lot of people, undoubtedly.
(I’ve always felt that the media rewards highly effeminate/queeny gay men due to this kind of homophobia, i.e., if we can portray ourselves as approving of gays and lesbians while holding them at arm’s length - which is easy and excusable to do if they act ridiculously - then we can have our cake and eat it, too, but I digress…)
Hmph, the diference between pepsi and coke is less than 1%…they’re both water, high fructose corn syrup, CO2, carmel coloring and flavor…
Perhaps there’s a hidden message there. The difference between a gay and straight couple is probably less than the difference between pepsi and coke.
You’ve loved, hated, been hurt, cared for people. How would YOU feel if somebody told you your feelings didn’t count?
I can’t tell you the preference in sexual orientation is genetic, chemical, environment, abuse, or some combination of these or other factors, I can tell you that it’s a bias based on difference. IMHO, that’s wrong.
If you study a bit of the development of a human embryo, and how the same starting cells become either a penis or a vagina, for example, based on tiny chromosomal triggers.
That’s a greatly simplified statement, but human males & females do develop from the same basic cell structure. The ‘plumbing’ is different, the wiring in the brain is a bit different, etc, but the vast majority of the body structure is identical.
**Unintentionally Blank ** you either misunderstood what I ment or intentionally misrepresented it, marriage and ‘same sex marriage’ is the coke/pepsi difference, not female/male and has to do with the meaning of the word.
Anyway t-bonham@scc.net, if the only difference is plumbing, then why do homosexuals want to be with the same gender and hetrosexuals want to be with oppisite, are you willing to say that it is all just a ‘plumbing fettish’?
) When did you ever hear a homophobe also talk about their “discomfort” with heterosexual anal intercourse? How often do you hear the term “tits and ass”? Like what good is that “ass” in “tits and ass” if you aren’t going to do something with it? I mean, good hygiene is important for sexual relations no matter what/who we are talking about.