by Cherina Jones
There is this argument that many people who supported the gay marriage ban in California did so to protect their pastors and churches. It has been stated that gays and lesbians will have the right to sue pastors and churches or have them jailed for not performing gay weddings. I am not familiar with the language of proposition 8, but in defense of many gays and lesbians, no one wants to be where they are not welcome. There are plenty of LGBT affirming religious institutions that would welcome gay and lesbian weddings. Being wed by pastors who don’t have your best interest in mind or don’t support your union is not beneficial to any couple gay or straight.
Any proposition or amendment should not force anyone to perform a marriage ceremony. Equally, no proposition or amendment should take away the right for two adults to be married, gay or straight. There should be no crime in loving someone. When two heterosexual people love each other, the inevitable result is typically marriage. They desire to create a home for themselves and raise a family like any other heterosexual couple would. The inevitability for homosexuals is that we will be together with our partners, unprotected by the law, unable to obtain the same benefits that heterosexual couples have. Our unions are disregarded as flings and phases. We are ridiculed and disrespected because of who we are and who we love.
The result of proposition 8 proves how far behind we sill are as country. I am always amazed when the sanctity of marriage is raised to refute homosexual unions, as if the near 50% divorce rate in this country is indicative of that sanctity. I am disappointed to know that there are millions of gay and lesbian couples who have been together for years, and understand the sanctity of what marriage really means. I am disheartened to realize that those gay and lesbian couples will not have an opportunity to celebrate their union in ways in which their heterosexual peers take it for granted. There are many men and women who have been married and divorced several times, being able to exercise their right to marriage at the drop of a hat. What if a proposition passed that restricted people to one marriage? I suppose there would be protests and aggressive resistance. I am sure there would be chants about how impractical and asinine such a law would be. There would be people defending their right to fall in love—again. The problem with that, whether heterosexual or homosexual, no one should have to fight for their right to love openly and freely. We still have a lot of work to do.
There is this argument that many people who supported the gay marriage ban in California did so to protect their pastors and churches. It has been stated that gays and lesbians will have the right to sue pastors and churches or have them jailed for not performing gay weddings. I am not familiar with the language of proposition 8, but in defense of many gays and lesbians, no one wants to be where they are not welcome. There are plenty of LGBT affirming religious institutions that would welcome gay and lesbian weddings. Being wed by pastors who don’t have your best interest in mind or don’t support your union is not beneficial to any couple gay or straight.
Any proposition or amendment should not force anyone to perform a marriage ceremony. Equally, no proposition or amendment should take away the right for two adults to be married, gay or straight. There should be no crime in loving someone. When two heterosexual people love each other, the inevitable result is typically marriage. They desire to create a home for themselves and raise a family like any other heterosexual couple would. The inevitability for homosexuals is that we will be together with our partners, unprotected by the law, unable to obtain the same benefits that heterosexual couples have. Our unions are disregarded as flings and phases. We are ridiculed and disrespected because of who we are and who we love.
The result of proposition 8 proves how far behind we sill are as country. I am always amazed when the sanctity of marriage is raised to refute homosexual unions, as if the near 50% divorce rate in this country is indicative of that sanctity. I am disappointed to know that there are millions of gay and lesbian couples who have been together for years, and understand the sanctity of what marriage really means. I am disheartened to realize that those gay and lesbian couples will not have an opportunity to celebrate their union in ways in which their heterosexual peers take it for granted. There are many men and women who have been married and divorced several times, being able to exercise their right to marriage at the drop of a hat. What if a proposition passed that restricted people to one marriage? I suppose there would be protests and aggressive resistance. I am sure there would be chants about how impractical and asinine such a law would be. There would be people defending their right to fall in love—again. The problem with that, whether heterosexual or homosexual, no one should have to fight for their right to love openly and freely. We still have a lot of work to do.
1 comments:
Yes proposition 8 really does show how far behind we are! Obama being elected was a victory but, we still have a TON of work to do. I'm still pissed about prop 8 but, we just have to keep fighting.
Post a Comment