Back on the soap box...

It was pointed out to me recently that I have been conspicuously absent from the blogosphere, so here I am, back again! :) And, of course, I am back up on my soap box once more...

Proposition 8... The death of same sex marriage in California, after such notable weddings as Ellen DeGeneres and Star Trek's Mr. Sulu, was voted into the California state constitution even as the country stepped momentously forward by electing our first ever African American president. Now the opponents of the amendment that officially and (arguably) permanently ended the hope of marriage for gay couples in that state are going to have their day in court. Well over a year later, the California state supreme court has agreed to hear the case of one Paul Katami, to decide whether, with the passage of Prop 8, gay men and women in California had been relegated to second class status.

Now, to be fair, California does recognise civil unions between same sex couples, and the state affords them with the same rights as any married couple. So the question really being answered now is whether that is good enough. This battle, I believe, will go all the way to the US Supreme court, should the choose to hear it, no matter who wins in California, so it really is the beginning of the fight for America. Is it good enough to say that legally, we recognise same sex couple as real, and deserving of the rights that allow one to care for the other in times of need, and the right to legally bind their lives together?

I believe, personally, that marriage should be a strictly religious institution, for anyone. Gay or heterosexual, I believe that in the eyes of the law, we should all enter into the same type of legal union, that tells us that we can share insurance policies and file joint tax returns. In the eyes of the law, we should ALL be equal. Let the question of marriage be decided in the religious establishments from whence it came. If you believe that you should be united in the eyes of God (whichever light you seem Him in), then ask for His blessing. What place does legislation have in answering that question? Why does the word marriage even appear in the constitution of California, or any other state? We separate church and state for a reason, so that issues like this, where there is deep, vibrant, and justifiable passion on both sides of the debate, do not enter into the halls of our governmental establishments. My view, however, is likely looked at as unrealistic at best, as the words "legal marriage" have been found together, married, you might say, in our governmental and legal language for most of the history of this country.

So maybe re-defining marriage is not the answer to this debate, but how will this all play out?

Here's the way that I look at the whole argument:
#1) Marriage is a wonderful, loving institution, and everyone should be allowed, if they so choose, to share in its benefits, spiritual as well as legal. The spiritual side may not come from a civil union for some people.
#2) Does it really hurt anyone for two men to get married? or two women? Did our eyes burn out of our heads when we looked at pictures from the wedding of Ellen DeGeneres and Portia DiRossi? Mine didn't...
#3) What business is it of yours if I, or anyone else, wanted to marry a woman? Really, I'd like to know... Just because two men got married somewhere in your state, does that cause some kind of cosmic event that changes the way you run your family? We have seen that children grow up with the beliefs and ideals bestowed upon them by their parents at a young age. Think of those poor kids in that crazy Kansas church... Their parents had no problems convincing them that their god sees no place for gay couples...

Bottom line: It is hard enough to find a person to love you, faults and all, for the rest of your life... How can anyone possibly tell someone who has been lucky enough to find that kind of love that they are not worthy of sharing the connection that marriage provides?