Let me start by stating, I don’t believe in gay marriage.
In fact, I don’t know if I believe in marriage at all. Well, to clarify, I don’t believe in the word ‘marriage’.
Gay marriage has been back in the news lately as a result of midterm elections. The measure has been voted down in a majority of states that included it on the ballot.
My two best friends are gay and both are in serious relationships. I love them both and want them to have everything that I have. But what that really boils down to is domestic security and equal rights.
And semantics.
Marriage is really just a partnership, an agreement, an economic transaction. But Bible beaters seem to get their panties in a twist over the symbolism and semantic importance of ‘marriage’. Time and time again, the base of their argument is “the Bible defines marriage as between a man and a woman.”
Well, as a good non-practicing Catholic, I consulted my Bible. It says quite a few interesting things about marriage actually, including:
Ephesians 5:23 – For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.
Colossians 3:18 – Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.
Mark 10:7-9 – Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.
To begin, the U.S. seems to have moved past that whole “wife subservient to the husband” deal without deteriorating as a country. Of course then we get into family values which I’ll just gloss over as something I’m too pissed off to discuss rationally.
But this last passage is the key here – “let man not separate”. The Bible is saying point-blank “don’t get divorced”.
It angers me that we are more concerned with not allowing gays to “marry” than actually preserving what the word means. It angers me that we require gays to “marry” to achieve the tax benefits, etc that come with the term. I think homosexual couples should find it insulting that we straight-people assume they want to get married, that it’s nothing more than be recognized for what they already are – life-long partners that want to share their lives.
I think the word ‘marriage’ is changing. I think it needs to change. I think it needs to be replaced with a less loaded term and something that more adequately explains what it really is – domestic partnership, committed relationship – then maybe we can make some progress.
10 responses so far ↓
Chris Conrey // November 6, 2009 at 12:32 am |
Some rational points here but I think Bully hit it best when he said that it is nothing more than a business transaction between two parties and should be treated as such by the government.
Let those who wish a religious aspect of marriage to exist continue to do so, and those who want only the “rights” portions with the economic ramifications and legal ramifications be able to do so as well.
Don Crossland // November 6, 2009 at 1:25 pm |
I think the government should stay out of it all together. Marriage is a private institution and should not be a public one. The government is way overstepping it’s bounds by deciding who can and cannot get married. There was a time when interracial marriages were illegal and now we look back on that with distain. How long before we look back the same way at the gay marriage ban. Here is a great article about the government and marriage. http://is.gd/4OQZW
Katie Charland // November 6, 2009 at 12:37 am |
Yes, I completely agree. I think that should be allowed of any couple, hetero or homo. It’s a small protest from the hetero community, but it’s there. Committment is committment without needing to bring religion into it.
cindy // November 6, 2009 at 7:33 am |
Speaking as someone who just celebrated a 20th wedding anniversary, I think I can safely say that marriage is the most culturally overloaded term I can think of (and seeing as cultural constructions of truth and meaning are my field of research, I’ve got a lot of terms to choose from). I’ve never worn a wedding ring, so people I meet don’t know I’m married right off the bat, but the second I tell someone I’m married, their impression of me shifts – the direction of that shift is linked to their personal value set – but it shifts nonetheless. Those values shifts come with expectations of gender roles, faith, culture, ethnicity, income class, age, my physical appearance – a whole bunch of things. If you want to feel pelted in the head by someone else’s values, tell them you’re married.
I love my partnership. This is the way I want to live my life. Because I see the world through this lens, I assume other people what to partner up too. And honestly, the married club could use more happy, devoted couples because the popular cultural construction of marriage (on film, screen and in text) is bleak. More than that, I can’t imagine how we as a nation can stand on the argument that some people are granted rights while others are excluded.
But if Chris and I had met last year, and we were talking about spending our life together today, would we get married? Even under the intense cultural pressure of our ethnic and religious heritages? No. If the legal benefits associated with marriage are not available to our gay friends, then we couldn’t enter into it ourselves in good conscience. With each passing week since the drive for “marriage amendments” began, it gets harder and harder to look the people we love in the eye and know that their relationships aren’t legitimized by law. It’s awful, and it’s ethically and morally wrong.
If I had to do it again, I wouldn’t worry about scandalizing the family by moving in with my partner. I would push back hard by challenging their very notions of love and faithfulness. It is hateful to tell people their way of knowing and being is wrong. As a nation, we’ve broken faith with more than 10% of our citizens over this one issue. How can we wax poetic about fidelity in the face of this fact?
Perri Collins // November 6, 2009 at 7:41 am |
Preach it, girl!
The fact is, it WILL change, just like everything else. It’s just slow coming.
Stacy // November 6, 2009 at 8:14 am |
There is a depressingly large amount of America that believes that superstitiously Bad Things will happen to our nation if we allow gays to marry — wrath of God things. The recent elections are a symptom of that problem. We condemn religious fanaticism abroad, but fail to deal with it at home. But until we deal with it, we’ll never have a “live and let live” secular society.
Tweets that mention Marriage and State « Katie Charland -- Topsy.com // November 6, 2009 at 1:28 pm |
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Katie Charland, Katie Charland. Katie Charland said: What's keeping me up so late? Marriage. Read on –http://bit.ly/3d7hzd [...]
lxndr // November 6, 2009 at 1:47 pm |
Marriage is effectively a corporation. It amazes me that it gets so many exceptions and so little equality. I’m waiting for the day that not only can two people of either gender get married, but that the legal definition expands beyond simply two people. I have a lot of friends in quite stable poly relationships.
And personally, I condemn religious fanaticism at home. Not that the fanatics listen to my condemnation!
Like Perry, I believe that one day it will change. I’m just flabbergasted that ‘one day’ isn’t today.
anonymousCoward // November 7, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
In my view the government destroys everything it touches. I’d much rather it just ignore our religions entirely and not recognize marriage at all.
Why can’t everyone just leave us alone?
uberVU - social comments // November 9, 2009 at 4:34 pm |
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by katiecharland: What’s keeping me up so late? Marriage. Read on –http://bit.ly/3d7hzd…