|
2004.02.21
Gay Marriage
I bet you'll never hear a politician admit it, but this is yet another Church v. State issue. Consider where the premise for the view that "Marriage is Only between One Man and One Woman" comes from--a religious framework, right?
Such premise for definition isn't even from the Bible--as there are all kinds of polygamist examples in there--especially, in the old testament. In America, we know what kind of prejudice there is about that. I believe, this religious premise came long after Jesus died. Even He would have a woman marry her dead husband's brother--whether that brother was already married or not. I wonder if it was when fanatical Ceasars and Popes were making up rules about celibacy, sexuality and spirituality, that a bunch of this bunk got started...and then was continued thru various historical opptunities of bigotry, since.
This definition certainly isn't from the framework of Biology, either...where in the Primate Kingdom alone, there is Patriarchy, Matriarchy, Monogamy, Polygamy, Homosexuality, Bisexuality and Sex with closely Related partners. About the only sexual relationship that seems unpracticed is that of Mother / Son.
Now, I am not suggesting that because the rest of the animal kingdom does what they do--we should do it, too. But, I am suggesting that the animal kingdom tells us what is natural and spontaneous (Dare I say, the way GOD Created it). It tells us what our options are and what foundation stands as the edge we progress from. It is our gift as conscious beings to embrace concepts of reason, self restraint and discipline--because we know spontaneous reaction is not always the most mature and constructive one. This IS the process of Mastery.
We can also insist that "procreation" only comes from a man and a woman and that's a premise for a definition. But, as you well know--no "marriage" is necessary for making babies. Especially, now that test tube babies are common enough--we don't even really need to have sex.
Also, the rate of affairs and open marriage that are reported in heterosexual marriage, makes me think marriage is not even about fidelity anymore. Ultimately, it would seem that a definition for marriage is more about life time commitment and shared resources than it is about sexuality.
But, I'll tell you what: "What the World Needs Now, Is Love, Sweet Love." And if any two, three, four...consenting "adults" want to work together toward committed healthy relationship and lifetime growth--why does anyone want to get in the way of that?
Is it because the conservative population is so frightened that their children will learn tolerance for these kinds of devotions and then become infected by them? Become one of them? The Homosexual / Transgender population is proportionately a very small part of our whole population. I have heard numbers of between 5 - 15%. This stands to reason, if you believe in statistical bell curves. It's not a number that is going to expand and overtake the population; because, the law of natural averages insists that heterosexuality will always dominate.
Homosexual and polygamist relationship has been embraced by many cultures--both, old and current. I believe, the historical evidence suggests pendulum swings of high success with it and backlashes of resistance to it. Sounds like it all could stand some open-minded Objective scrutiny.
One of the deepest emotional "needs" people have is to love and to be loved. So, being able to celebrate a partnership of lifetime commitment with all of its ensuing rights, to a public universe, is a gift of personal joy. Live and let Live, Damn it!
| 