We have been indoctrinated with a lot of moral programming (countless generations have considered it wrong to lie, cheat, steal, murder, etc…). The fact that I was indoctrinated to believe these things were bad does not in itself mean that they aren’t.
Yes, I’m being a little bit of a devils’ advocate, because once I decide I want to be able to look myself in the mirror and KNOW that I’ve made the right decision.
Does it matter whether you’re “as morally culpabable as the oppressors”?
It seems to me that if you let injustice happen, and look away, and you’re a citizen of the republic which perpetrates this injustice, then you’re morally culpable. As a citizen, you have both the power and the duty of civic engagement, and if you decide not to use your position to combat an injustice being perptrated by the republic, you have to accept moral responsiblity for your decision, and its consequences for others.
And the claim that you’re “not so bad as Hitler” might be entirely justified , but so what?
Framing the question as just one of gay marriage obscures the larger point-- gay rights don’t just include the right to marry. In many place, I can still legally be refused service because I’m bi. I can be fired for it. How can we participate in society if we are systematically denied equal access to employment and public spaces? At best, we’re second-class citizens; at worst, we’re a permanent underclass.
So, if you care about civil rights at all, you should care about this.
We’re only about 3% of the population. We’re only going to get equal status if people like you show up and support us. Nobody expects you to volunteer large amounts of your time or to show up and picket, but it is important that you treat us as equals in your everyday life and in your voting record.
You should be against it because there is no constitutionally acceptable reason to be for it.
It is not constitutional to legally bar two consenting single adults from marrying each other for any other reason whatsoever, except for being too closely biologically related. If we’re going to say that age, race, religion, size, sexual tastes, reproductive fertility, ethnic heritage, native language, national origin, etc. etc. etc., are all illegitimate grounds for denying marriage rights to a couple, then somebody has to come up with a valid reason why denying marriage rights on the grounds of gender is legitimate.
The only arguments against including same-sex partners in civil marriage law are ultimately religious in nature. And whether or not you agree with religious arguments against SSM, it is not constitutional to appeal to religious belief to restrict the legal definition of marriage.
Even if you believe that SSM is morally wrong according to your own religious doctrine—and you have every right to hold such a belief—you should still oppose, as a civil-liberties-loving American, any attempt by a secular government to enact a religious belief as law.
Because you presumably have empathy for other people? I don’t know you, so maybe I’m wrong.
With all due respect, it wouldn’t affect my life if you were brutally murdered tomorrow- but if someone asked how I feel about the idea of you being brutally murdered, I’d say I’m opposed because I don’t think people should be treated that way. I think people’s rights should be respected whether or not I know the person and whether or not that right personally affects me. I assume you’re generally familiar with the arguments for an against SSM, so I’ll say that whether you protest anti-SSM laws and politicians is your business; I’m not inclined to tell people how they should spend their time. But caring doesn’t cost you anything. Why shouldn’t you care? Of course by the same token, caring alone doesn’t accomplish much - so I don’t think I need to plead with you to care.
Because it is the right thing to do.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Attributed, (probably in error), to Edmund Burke, but still true.
A simple answer:
If you say “I don’t care about (laws prohibiting) gay marriage,” you’re saying “I don’t care about injustice — as long as it’s not visited upon me.”
Are you comfortable saying this?
And are you OK with others saying this when the day comes you yourself are the victim of an injustice?
Do you know any gay couples? Do you know any gay couples who would like to be married? If you do, or if you imagine you do, imagine how you would explain a vote against SSM to them.
Personally, as a gay male who is planning on marrying my partner, I’m fine with your position. If you do vote, I would hope you vote in favor of marriage of course or be a supporter. But I’d rather you be indifferent than actively opposed.
Yes. By not speaking out, you automatically get counted in the “Silent Majority” by the oppressors.
As culpable? No. Culpable? Yes. These people are actively asking for your support. And you’d go “Meh!”
I think you need a better examplar for 1, personally.
There are two big questions: is denying various elements of civil law such as marriage to gay people the right thing to do?; and, if it isn’t, how hard must any individual work on giving equal civil rights to gay people? I think that by stating agreement above you are acknowledging that gay people should have equal civil rights. I think you are now only asking how hard you in particular are obligated to try.
As a general observation, we are social animals that live by interacting. And, most of us have a huge surplus of most of the really critical necessities – we have enough food that our struggle is to not get fat, we have enough shelter that our struggle is not to have too much clutter, we have enough safety that if we have guns we use them for sport, and so forth. I think we carry a fairly big obligation to try to be forces for good and not evil.
So, in the particular case of gay civil rights and marriage equality, how much effort does it take to fix the underlying problem? Well, the underlying problem is that some people put effort into deliberately mistreating gay people. If nobody did that, there would be zero problem. This isn’t like searching for a cure for cancer. It isn’t even like trying to fix global climate change. All that is required is for people to not support those who deliberately mistreat gay people. If nobody voted for any politicians who mistreat gay people, this problem would go away completely.
Since you ask, I think at a minimum to be a decent human being you must observe this level of good behavior and make sure you don’t support any politician in their wrongdoing.
This issue is an important one to me, and I can report it really isn’t much trouble to sign up for regular automatic donation to one of the charities that work to educate people about marriage equality. There are related issues such as ENDA and transgender rights that are less far along, too, you can help with. This is optional.
I get the sentiment that anything bad in the world that we accept and ignore, we are somewhat responsible. But I also understand that there are way more problems than any person can work on, so it’s unavoidable that we’re going to share responsibility for bad stuff no matter how hard we try. Trying to help out with the things that seem most horrible and take the least effort to fix seems a wise approach, and LGBT civil rights will give you a pretty efficient return on your effort!
This.
Do you feel empathy? I’m not trying to be a dick, I’m just wondering if you ever considered what it would be like if you were denied the rights that others have because of who you are. I was once like you. When I was a teenager I was indifferent to homosexuals having the right to be married.
I was in a Government class as a senior in high school, and one of our assignments was to pick a topic to debate with someone else in the class room. The thing was, we got to choose our topic of debate, but we couldn’t decide which side of the topic we were arguing for. I chose ‘gay marriage’ because at the time I didn’t care which side of the issue I was assigned to take. I ended up arguing against it, due to a coin toss.
I actually won the debate by one vote, (all the kids in the class had to vote on who was the best at arguing the side they were assigned to, NOT which side they personally agreed with). I had to work VERY hard on that assignment. It might have been a turning point for me, because they more research I did for the debate, the more I felt that the other student had the best arguments, and would most likely win.
I wouldn’t be able to argue SSM again, because now I’m way too passionate about the side I was arguing against in high school.
I’m straight and I don’t know if I would ever want to be married to a woman, but I sure as hell would be pissed if someone were to say I have no right to be married. It’s about marriage, but it’s also about being free. We pride ourselves on being a free country, but if I were a homosexual, I would wonder why I don’t have to same opportunities as everyone else.
You seem to care about what’s “moral”, and I admire that. I humbly ask you to really think about what YOU think is right and what’s fair.
Thanks for the responses. I’m still reading but my computer is in the shop, reading is OK but it’s tough to type lengthy responses on my tablet. Ill be more engaged tomorrow night.
You should be very concerned about how individual judges are overturning laws, including constitutional amendments, enacted by popular votes. Very concerned.
Consider prohibitions on having more than one husband or wife. There is no reason that such a prohibition can be kept if same-sex marriage is permitted. Homosexuals are not discriminated against. It is a straw man argument. Anyone can marry anyone of legal age so long as the other person person is of the opposite sex. That’s what marriage is.
Marriage was instituted to protect women and children, and furnish grounds for considering them the ‘property’ of the husband. They are ‘his’. Thus the tradition of the father ‘giving away’ the bride. People need to understand the history of marriage. The whole argument is a fraud.
Because that is not marriage. You cannot arbitrarily change the meanings of words. Remember 1984?
Dude, say what?
Seriously, you are saying that gay marriage will lead to polygamy? Does this mean that if gays are finally allowed to get married in Texas…my husband will get a new wife?
Or does it mean that I’ll end up with another husband? Because I totally refuse to do that.
Ahhhh…looks at join date…
Sorry for the double post. To the OP, like you, I don’t care much about other people’s sex lives. But, I also think that this world doesn’t have enough love and happiness. Differently gendered folks won’t ever impact your life, you don’t need to go on marches or anything.
Voting for love is never a bad idea.
If you’re not going to care about gay marriage to the point of speaking up against actual bigotry (like in person, or online gaming) or raising money or otherwise doing something to further the cause, then it really doesn’t matter. Your opinions aren’t going to change the world. Unless you intend to act on them, your thoughts don’t matter to anyone but you.
No doubt there are lots of slacktivists out there who would disagree. But merely talking about awesome it would be if gay marriage were legal on a hugbox forum or facebook (while sitting on your ass and putting nothing on the line) is not a worthwhile hobby.
Yeah, glad I noticed that before I posted my response.