7 responses

  1. Priya Lynn
    January 29, 2013

    What I was thinking was that marriage equality isn’t necessarily about equality, its about having a marriage itself – the goal is to have a marriage, and equality in a sense is irrelevant to that. Or at least that would be the case for many gays and lesbians, for other gays and lesbians who have no personal desire to marry it may be primarily about gaining equality rather than a marriage itself.

  2. Gene in L.A.
    January 29, 2013

    There’s a variation of this argument that I’ve heard a number of times, which is that gay men aren’t being discriminated against by being refused the right to marry another man, because we already have the equal right to marry a woman. Under this thinking, allowing us to marry a man is really giving us a “special” right. Of course, the fact that they would also have the new right created by marriage equality doesn’t occur to them, because they don’t need or want it.

    The reality is that it isn’t the right to marry a man that’s the gist of all this; it’s the right to marry WHOM WE CHOOSE, without any input or restriction from others. It’s no coincidence that choice is what it boils down to. “Anti-choice” doesn’t refer only to abortion. People think if they don’t want something no one else needs it either. The basic problem is authoritarianism.

  3. Ben in Oakland
    January 29, 2013

    I would add this:
    The idea that this is “all about equality” is yet another way To dismiss the whole argument as not really being about marriage at all, but about SOMETHING ELSE.

    In one sense, this is correct. Equality is not the goal, it is the by product of ending this vicious prejudice that says we must be treated differently than heterosexuals for the simple reason that we are not heterosexual…

    …As if the only people that matter in the world are heterosexual, and everyone else simply doesn’t matter, which is rob’s point. As an American citizen, a tax payer, and a law abiding, productive, contributing member of my community, I beg to disagree.

    It is yet another attempt to ignore the same reality that your first column dealt with: marriage is about all kinds of things in our society: rights, benefits, obligations, family, responsibilities. It is not just about what religious conservatives think marriage is about. When they claim it is only about procreation, that simply isn’t true. There isnt a jurisdiction in the united states, and probably in the world, that requires procreation, or even sexual contact, for an opposite marriage to be legal and valid. in short, It’s more of heterosexuals applying a standard to us that they wouldn’t dream of applying to themselves.

    In other words, it’s not us that is trying to redefine marriage. It’s THEM! As always when it comes to antigay bigots, whatever they say is them projecting upon us.

    As I always say to those who make this claim, my love, my life, my family, my children, my religious faith, and my assets are every bit as important as theirs, and deserve exactly the same legal protections as they award to themselves.

    Nothing more and nothing less.

  4. Steve
    January 29, 2013

    @Gene in L.A.
    They also argued that anti-miscegenation laws weren’t discrimination because people had the right to marry someone of their own race

  5. Lindoro Almaviva
    January 29, 2013

    Marriage does come with legal rights, but the rights we care most about the ones that help us live up to our responsibilities: the right to be in that hospital room, to provide medical care, to make decisions when your partner cannot, to ensure he can support himself if you are taken, to give your employer an honest reason when you take a personal day for his sake, to live in the same room, the same home, the same country without fearing discrimination or separation.

    The man has no sense of irone does he? This kind of stuff just eludes them all together. Sometimes it is like a clown car.

  6. palerobber
    January 29, 2013

    great post about equality and the pursuit of human happiness.


  7. Ian
    January 30, 2013

    “Human beings have rights simply because we’re human.”

    This got me thinking, why do humans have rights?

    Would be great if somebody elaborated on this, cause it sounded circular. Oh wai-

Leave a Reply




Back to top
mobile desktop