Saturday, May 15, 2004

Gay Marriage

."Hey, honey, would you eat that snack cracker in your special outfit for me?" Alternative lifestyles, up next. And why Bush needs to leave the Constitution alone and uphold the 14th Ammendment as it stands. Gay marriage? "Why Margaret, isn't everybody 'gay' on their wedding day?" "Oh John, that was fifty years ago!"

Seems like a lot of folks have got their knickers in a twist over this whole Gay Marriage thing. The Big Question seems to be the "legality" of such unions. Some folks want them "outlawed", some folks favor so-called "civil unions" and some folks think they are just alright. I fall into the last category. Honestly, folks, what's all the hoopla about? Marry who-ever you want, ferchrissakes! If you don't approve of Gays & Lesbians, don't marry one!

Now a lot of you who still believe that homosexuality is a "choice" will argue that Gay Marriage jeopafdizes the "traditional" family unit. Perhaps you're afraid your children may be led into "choosing" to be "queer". Nothing could be further from the truth. Just ask Dick Cheney or Dick Gephardt, both of whom have daughters who are lesbians. Were both Cheney and Gephardt "bad" parents? Were their children "misled"? Or is homosexuality something a person is born with? I work in the Entertainment business and I have a lot of Gay and Lesbian friends. We have discussed this ad nauseum over pints into the wee hours of many a morning. Not one of them said they chose to be Gay! In fact, one Lesbian friend of mine confessed to me that at times she wished she were straight because it would have made her life so much easier to deal with. Doesn't sound like someone who "chose" to be Gay to me. She can no more bring herself to view men as appropriate "partners" than I can. It's not her fault, it's not her "choice", and folks, it doesn't make her a "bad" person.

There is, however, one person in a position of authority here in the good ole U S of A who does get the whole thing though, our President, George Walker Bush. Bush realizes that this issue is NOT one of legality, but rather, constitutionality! The 1st Article of the 14th Ammendment of the Constitution of The United States of America states:

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Anybody see anything there that excludes Gays and Lesbians? Neither do I. That's why Bush wants to amend the Constitution to exclude Gays and Lesbians! So how would the 14th Ammendment look? Maybe like this:

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, unless said citizens are, due to unwise and immoral lifestyle choices, faggots.

What next? For all you Righties out there who love your firearms,(I know I love mine!), couldn't this lead to an Amendment of the 2nd Ammendment? You know, a "clarification" or re-defining of the "Right to keep and bear arms"? Anti-gun activists have long made the argument that this singular line guaranteeing our rights to self-protection actually refers to the individual state's right to form a militia and not the individual's right to own firearms. Maybe a future "liberal" president could "clear this up" for us.

The point is, it's dangerous to fool with the Constitution. Once you start, where do you stop? As for Gay marriage? Hey, if a religion doesn't want to perform them, fine. But until the Constitution is meddled with by fear driven homophobes, it is the States' constitutinal obligation to perform and recognize them and to extend to Gays the same rights and privileges enjoyed by the rest of us. As Scroff at Any Which Way would say, "Bush! Keep your Bible off my laws!"

(For more on this, from MY point of view, there is an excellent post at Any Which Way I would encourage you to read.

deuddersun