?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Wise Tits [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Wise Tits

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

where's the right to legislate a personal belief? [Sep. 5th, 2008|05:22 am]
Wise Tits

wise_tits

[jesuismeursault]
[Current Location |home]
[Current Mood |annoyedannoyed]
[Current Music |rien]

i was just in the store and noticed people magazine announcing the marriage of ellen degeneres and portia de rossi. i thought, good for them, i guess, if that's what they want to do. it got me thinking about the whole issue of gay rights, which got me thinking about people in general. i don't understand the reasoning behind not allowing gay marriage, especially when we are given equal protection under the law in the constitution. i know the arguments that use the bible as a backdrop but, as far as the law goes (and it is strictly a legal matter), marriage is just a contract between two people. so, why can't anyone of legal age get in on it, gay or straight? you can't deny a gay person a home or car loan because he/she is gay; that would be against the law, so why does it work with this specific contract? i see this as more legislation of people's personal opinions. person A does not like the idea of gays marrying for whatever reason (usually religious, which shouldn't matter in a legislative matter in the first place), so that person decides to make laws banning it. my question to person A is: why do you care? allowing same-sex marriage does not mean you then have to marry someone of the same sex. i'm not a lesbian and the idea of being with another woman is not an appealing one for me, but that doesn't mean that i should be able to tell others they cannot marry someone of the same sex. personally, i don't care what goes on between two consenting, law-abiding adults. and i suppose it's a good thing i don't care, since it's none of my damned business in the first place. i don't understand the desire to legislate personal opinion. if you don't like the idea of gay marriage, don't marry someone of your same sex. if you don't like the idea of abortion, don't have one. if you don't like inter-racial marriages, then marry within the confines of your race. it's that simple. why must everyone else be forced to be like the most pseudo-pious/self-righteous among us?
LinkReply

Comments:
From: d_h_belmont
2008-09-08 09:44 pm (UTC)
I remember one (obviously flawed) arguement that to allow same sex marriage would mean that people would go out and marry each other just to get benefits at work. I had heard that a new study showed that one in seven marriages today are for getting benefits at work... there goes another argument.

As for the marriage statistics, a little research suggested that 40 to 60 percent of NEW marriages will end in divorce at some point. Of these, 20 percent will end within the first five years, and 33 percent within the first ten. The median length of a marriage is eleven years.

And for those still playing the home game, that brings the tally up to four. Pretty arrogant, no? Loads of laughs.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: jesuismeursault
2008-09-09 05:21 am (UTC)
marriage is a great institution and it offers a neat bundle of benefits to both parties. however, there is no inherent sanctity in the process. in the eyes of the law (and this is what's important here), it is no more than a contract between two people. it's closer to a business contract than anything else. two people agree to work together in return for a certain set of benefits; if the business fails, the contract can be dissolved in a way that suits both parties. where is the sanctity? any meaning involved in the writing of this contract is placed there only by the two people getting married. some people treat marriage as just something cool to do one afternoon, others treat it like a sacred joining of two people. the meaning of marriage is subjective, not objective. that's why some can treat it as though it means nothing, while others cherish the ritual. the way the vows are taken is a matter of choice, not something that should be legislated.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)