-by Steve Lachman
I'm in a mixed marriage. That is, my wife is left-handed, and I, as
God intended, am right-handed.
A couple hundred years ago, many people believed that left-handed
people were possessed by the devil. So left-handedness was literally
beaten out of this unfortunate minority — with resulting negative
consequences on mental performance and dexterity. Because we now know
that left-handedness is merely a genetic abnormality, and not a
spiritual one, my wife and I can enjoy wedded bliss.
Not that long ago, mixed marriages between races were also forbidden
but, fortunately, miscegenation laws in the United States have been
declared unconstitutional.
Despite some societal movement toward tolerance and inclusion, due to
our irrational prejudices, we still outlaw another form of marriage:
homosexual marriage. Opponents of gay marriage give a number of
reasons gay marriage should remain unlawful, such as: The Bible says
so (Leviticus 18:22-23: "You shall not lie with a male as one lies
with a female; it is an abomination"). The Quran has similar
prohibitions. Or AIDS is more easily spread through gay sex;
homosexual relationships cannot produce offspring; it's costly to
employers and the government to pay health and survivor's benefits to
gay partners; and marriage is by its nature a union between a man and
a woman.
I'll briefly address each of these objections.
As individuals, we are free to follow our religion's admonitions
against homosexual relationships. However, constitutionally, we have
separated church and state. The legal prohibition should not be
founded in religion unless it can be shown that it somehow otherwise
furthers the public welfare.
If we want to limit the spread of HIV through gay men, encouraging
stable monogamous relationships is a step in the right direction. The
absence of gay marriage did not stem the spread of AIDS in the 1980s
and '90s.
There are about 6.5 billion people in this overpopulated,
resource-stressed lifeboat called Earth, and you're worried that 4
percent of them won't reproduce? Plenty of married heterosexuals don't
have children, and we don't nullify their marriages. And an increasing
number of same-sex couples adopt, and many lesbian women have children
through artificial insemination.
Benefits are costly regardless of the sexual orientation of the
recipient. It's a price we pay for encouraging stable relationships
and ensuring that as many people as possible have health care and are
not left destitute.
Marriage has traditionally been between a man and a woman. It need not
stay that way. Because of anatomy and temperament, there is a
difference between a heterosexual relationship and a homosexual
relationship. If you want to call the homosexual partnership something
else, such as a "civil union," so be it, though some people will say
that by calling it a different name, we are denigrating it — and maybe
they're right. The point is to grant homosexuals the same rights of
economic security, emotional stability and societal acceptance as
heterosexuals. Why? Because we're all just people.
At long last, we have abolished "don't ask, don't tell." Let's abandon
our prejudices and take the logical next step: Legalize gay marriage.
It's time to stop forcing square pegs into round holes. I hope our own
state representatives will lead the charge.
Steve Lachman is an assistant professor of legal writing at the
Dickinson School of Law. He can be reached at stevelachman@gmail.com.
More:
http://www.centredaily.com/2011/01/13/2451567/its-time-end-prejudice-against.html
--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment