This will likely be my last post on this matter for a while unless something else comes up.

As I write this, there is a very thought-provoking back-and-forth going on at Brandon’s website.  I encourage you to go over there and chip in.  Regardless of your opinions on the gay-marriage issue, I think you should contribute.

That being said, I have not been swayed by anyone who rejoiced in the passing of Proposition 8.  I still think that anyone who voted for it needs a fucking tolerance enema.

I am for the legalization of gay marriage.  I think the revocation of this right in California is an abomination, and shame on all of you who voted for Prop 8.  Looking at the voting numbers for California is what initially got me riled up.  While a 60+ percent of Californians voted for Obama, only half of them voted against Prop 8.  Religious values (as well as values held by the African American and Latino community) were a huge contributing factor in this.  Indeed, religion was a huge factor in this, but so were cultural sentiments held by minority voters.  And for this, I tell the African American, Latino, Asian communities: Stop it.  You know what it feels like to be a minority in this country, and your conscious decision to push for the revocation of rights of another minority group is shameful.  Get your heads checked.

So far, the strongest argument in favor of the banning of gay marriage that I have heard at Brandon’s site was that marriage has historically (for “eons” I believe was the term was) been an institution nearly every society has defined as the union of man and woman.  Nothing else.  I agree.  For the entirety of history, this has been the definition of marriage.  As a social contract, I see how marriage is something that benefits society.  And I am all for that.  But society has never told someone that they HAVE to be married so as to protect the basis of a society.  If the union of a man and woman were such a significant brick in the foundation of our society, why then has the government not FORCED unions?  Because that would be absurd.  Would it be a travesty if the concept of the man/woman union became an issue when a man and woman who refused to get married cohabitated and even made and raised babies?  Yes it would.  If the government  and society as a whole strictly defined the “family” as a legally bound man and woman who choose to have children, there would be an uproar.  There would be a lot of kids with single moms and single dads, a lot of kids with moms and dads who lived together but weren’t married, a lot of kids who lived with aunts and uncles and grandparents who didn’t live in what was defined as a family.  The government has no business telling people what marriage is in order to preserve an “eons” old tradition.  Just the same, the government has no right to tell the people (the people who allow the government to exist, by the way) that they cannot redefine what a union is.

And the following notion is also absurd:

Marriage of same-sex couples, which will ultimately lead to family building, will infringe on the full, healthy development of a child.  As long as the lesbians or gay men who raise the child do so with the best interest of the child in mind, the child will grow up to be normal.  And what about heterosexual parents who eventually learned that their child had come out of the closet?  Does that mean that for some reason the traditional “eons” old marriage they participated in was a failure?  Did they do something wrong?  Did something in the way they raised their kid turn their kid into a homosexual?  Of course not.  They just had a gay kid.  For the homosexuals who want to be married, I think they should be able to do it.  And I think they should be able to adopt or even get a kid through old-school bumping’ ugly means.  And if for some reason that gay couple turns their back on a child when he or she decides he or she is not gay (and I don‘t really think this would happen), then shame on them.

Gay marriage will not corrupt society’s “eons” old definition of straight marriage.  Married gay couples will simply join the ranks of heterosexual married couples who contribute to society and raise decent children just as much as there will be married gay couples who are a bane on society and who raise shitty kids.

Nevertheless, marriage will maintain its strength as a building block of society.  Bob and Joe getting married will in no way diminish the significance or importance of John and Jane getting married.  And when Joe and Bob move in next door to John and Jane, their respective kids will likely do what kids do: be kids.  Bob and Joe’s kid will not spread gay or straight ideals to John and Jane’s kid, and the reverse will not happen either.  The kids will be kids.  And when they get older, they will make their own decisions on how they want to raise a family.  Good for them.  Hopefully, they will raise good families themselves, be they a family with gay parents or straight parents.  Maybe they won’t even want to get married.  Maybe they won’t even want to have kids.  Nevertheless, society will continue.  There will still be “traditional families” and, hopefully, a new kind of family.

And if my argument leads you to believe I am a liberal, then you have another thing coming.  I most certainly not.  I am a “moderate” if I have to be pigeonholed.  I have said this before and I will say it again, I have both liberal and conservative tendencies.  For the sake of full disclosure, here are my sentiments on some of the other issues out there:

ABORTION: I am pro-choice.  But if you use the “my body, my choice” as a justification because you were just too stupid to use a condom or birth control, then you are a shitty person.  Maybe you should consider dealing with it.  Maybe a gay couple will take it off your hands.  Then again, if you and your baby daddy are unable to care for the child in question and have considered all other options, by all means, suck that little clump of cells out of your abdomen.  There are already too many people on this planet.  Still, I don’t think society has the right to infringe its will on a female’s body.  You start telling women they can’t dump their little fetus, even if it isn’t for medical reasons, then you set a precedent for government control over the body of a woman.  What’s next?  Female circumcision?

SPREADING THE WEALTH: I think this is an absolutely ridiculous notion, and I truly do think it stinks of socialism.  I think there needs to be a set percentage based tax.  Joe Millionaire should have to pay the same tax percentage as Joe the Burger Slinger.  It’s just fair.  Sorry if you weren’t born into wealth, but I don’t think someone who has been born into wealth owes you shit.

GOING GREEN/OFFSHORE DRILLING:  I am still not sold on man’s culpability when it comes to the destruction of the environment.  It may just be a global cycle.  Then again, we could be absolutely fucking up our little mud ball.  What it really boils down to is that I don’t care.  Yes, I am apathetic to this issue.  That is my choice.  CHOICE.  So, if you want to reduce carbon emissions, I applaud you.  If you want to drill offshore and perpetuate our reliance on fossil fuels, go for it.  Not my battle, and as much heat as I may get for saying this, not my concern.

RACIAL PROFILING/WIRE-TAPPING/PATRIOT ACT:  I do think the world has changed.  I am a student of Islamic Studies, and as fascinated as I am with ancient and modern Middle East, it is an absolute truth that Islam, at its core, is for more Islam.  It is the nature of the religion.  It is, at it’s core, a peaceful religion and, quite frankly, the most rational of the Abrahamic religions, but it is also one that PROMOTES the destruction (by any means) any force that stands in its way.  That being said, I truly do believe there are radical Muslims who do wish to see what they perceive to be a Crusading Western power destroyed.  And I do think that many of these parties will use any means possible to do this.  I think this is a threat that was 50+ years in the making (read: America’s support for Israel) and that will continue for another century.  So, if you need to profile me or wiretap me, I don’t care.  I am not doing anything wrong, and when you hear me talking to friends on the phone about fisting, I hope you don’t vomit.  Sorry folks, the times have changed, and I wish some people would realize this.

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION: I am for the legalization (and taxation) of marijuana.  I never liked pot, but I have friends who would much rather smoke a bowl than have a drink.  It’s a harmless drug, and I think we need to decriminalize/legalize it.  That being said, CURRENTLY it is still illegal, and until it is made legal, I think anyone caught partaking/possessing/distributing the drug should be held fully accountable.

I am not liberal nor am I conservative.  I have varying opinions on hot issues oft debated by both sides, but I refuse to bind myself to either side.  I am not a Republican, not am I a Democrat.  I believe our two-party system is hindering America.  I am happy Obama got elected, but I would not have shed a tear if McCain got the office because I don’t think he would have brought a third Bush term (and for all of you nutty liberals out there who bought that shit, get your head checked).

But I do stand firm on the CIVIL RIGHTS issue associated with gay marriage.  Any of those other issues I just mentioned can yield reasonable and well-justified viewpoints from either side.  I think they are issues that should be argued back and forth because I think they are open-ended and I think silencing any sides viewpoints on them would be flat-out wrong.

Gay marriage is not an issue that I think needs to be argued.  I think it is a clear-cut case of discrimination, and I support the passing of a NATION-WIDE legalization of gay marriage.

Constitutionally, I believe homosexual marriage should be a guaranteed right.  And it should be something that is granted and then left granted - not granted and then voted on again.

So, bring it on.  Give them their rights.  Give them the ability to share in the same tax benefits, medical/insurance rights and family-building rights all of us heterosexuals can enjoy and take advantage of.

And I doubt that I have offered the same well-orated stance on the issue that Brandon has, but I felt the need to at least fully disclose how I feel about this issue.  I am better at being funny than being serious, I guess.  I hope what I said, though, impacts someone.  And as Brandon said in his post, if there is a time in Virginia when gay marriage prompts marching and hollering, I will be right there fighting for the rights of my fellow PEOPLE.