Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Marriage… Political decision or Freedom for all!

President Obama announced today that he now supports same-sex marriage:

         “I Think Same-Sex Couples Should Be Able to Get Married”

Was it the perfect decision, based on the perfect timing in his political agenda or was it a genuine opinion put forth, with a genuine timing?

So marriage, in 37 states, has been defined (and limited to) a union of one man and one woman. The thing that strikes me as interesting is; who is writing the law? Is it the founding fathers; that came here and imposed their will on the Native Americans, in the name of God? Is it the constitution; that originally allowed blacks to be slaves, and limited marriage to same race (forget about gender) couples? Is it our modern day Christian leaders; that share in the 50% divorce rate, and are being prosecuted by courts worldwide for indiscretions inside the church? I’m not pointing fingers, just merely asking the question….  

What is the core of the issue when speaking about Gay marriage? Is it really the fact that 2 humans of same gender want to unite their lives, or is it the use of the word “marriage” to identify the union that causes controversial reactions? Is it a moral concern that is dictating the opposition’s stand on passing the law or is it a political stand?
Would we be having such a controversy if instead of calling it a same gender union “marriage”, we officially called it… let’s say “a conjugal union”?

Well let’s narrow down the issue, as I feel we are going off on a tangent; the issue could be with allowing 2 adults (consenting adults), of same gender to formalize their relationship and not their capability or wish to have children. I believe the same gender union has become controversial, more so because of religious beliefs, than because of whatever “ramifications” the act would have on the country. Even though the United States of America is a secular country with freedom of religion, Christianity is the predominant religion. This obviously has strong influences on law, policy and government… and this is where the real core of the issue lies…

How would the union (marriage) of homosexuals impair or become prejudicial to that of heterosexual couples….. or to the nation in which we live? This is the same nation that claims to believe in equal rights for all mankind (basic principle in the US constitution).

My political opinion is that everyone should have equal rights. If we all have to pay same taxes and obey the same rules, why shouldn’t we have the same rights? I believe it is against this country’s constitution to deny anyone freedom to a legal union, based on their sexual preference. And if the issue is the use of the word “marriage”, which by right is a religious concept, the government should then create a word or term that would translate and officialise the contractual union of same sex couples; with the same rights that marriage gives heterosexual couples.
As the sacrament of marriage differs from the secular concept of this government and as churches and Christians take ownership of the word “marriage” and considerate it exclusive to whom and where it can be celebrated, the government needs to adjust so people are able to express their love in a civil/contractual union and have it recognized by the government, and not let religious beliefs impose on a contractual relationship.

Although I believe my (or our) moral stand-point shouldn’t matter in this case, here is what I think; I’m 100% for it. Why should marriage be just exclusive to couples of the opposite sex? Don’t we marry primarily for love (and other reasons)? Why should it be different for gay couples? Does it harm me? No… Is the worry of witnessing any PDA makes us reticent to accepting the relationship? Well it shouldn’t! Don’t we expect the same discretion from heterosexual couples? If  we want to be self-righteous and act as if we know what the wrath of God will be upon the gay union and those participating in it, why not let HIM do his work, in his due time? Christianity and religion is supposed to be about love, acceptance and equality. Jesus let himself be crucified to take away the sins of the world, both for those who crucified him, and those who would later arrive on the Earth. Our Christian leaders (and Christians themselves, who also have around a 50% divorce rate) have damaged the institution of marriage so much themselves, that to me it sounds more hypocritical to consider anyone not worthy of the institution.
As I can understand the desire to keep the sacrament of marriage celebrated in a church, I don’t believe that it should be the only option for officialising two lovers’ union.

So President Obama, I agree with your decision; whether it was made out of your absolute true belief, or you were just doing it to boost your re-election efforts.

"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves."
Abraham Lincoln

What is your stand? And is your stand base on religious beliefs or on political affiliation?

To loving freely,

1 comment:

  1. Au nom de qui aurait-on le droit d'empêcher deux personnes de s'aimer...

    L'amour, ce n'est pas une question de couleur de peau ou de sexe, à l'intérieur, nous sommes tous pareils, nous avons tous un coeur qui bat pour l'être aimé alors QUI a le droit d'empêcher les gens qui s'aiment de se marier ? Qui sommes-nous pour les juger de la sorte ?

    L'amour ne fait aucune distinction ni de couleur, ni de sexe alors pourquoi le ferions-nous ?



Blogger Widgets