January 10, 2005
Gay Marriage Tolerance
After a lot of thinking, arguing, and writing, I'm down to one nut that I can't crack, regarding how to argue in favor of gay marriage to those who are on the fence.
I think that since we're basically trying to convince people to vote in support of gay marriage, we can't really tell people that it's okay to be opposed to gay marriage. That's just mixed messages. At its root, we're telling people that they shouldn't be so opposed to gay marriage that they would vote against it. I think that saying, "Oh, it's okay to be against gay marriage. But vote for it anyways," comes across as pretty insulting to them.
But, it is considered reasonable to allow for people to be morally opposed to homosexuality. It's the old argument of how we can't force someone to be okay with something they just aren't okay with.
And, so it just gets stuck there. Here we are telling people it's okay to be opposed to homosexuality, but that they shouldn't be opposed to gay marriage.
It doesn't make sense to me.
Posted by Curt at January 10, 2005 11:37 AMI see what you mean. Have been following your thought process on this topic and was looking forward to what your eventual outcome would be.
From my own perspective, many of the friends I've become close to over the last 2-3 years are gay couples. And almost to a one, their opinion seems to be 'marriage is marriage, take the 'gay'equation out of it'.
When I look at it that way, marriage becomes a basic right.
It would be nice to ultimately forget about the homosexuality factor. I read on one blog, forget where (maybe here?) that encouraged gays to be out and be open and stay that way. And the more people they meet, the more people will know that gays are really just like everyone else.
One last comment. Christmas Eve I went to an Open House given by a gay couple I'm very close to. The subject of gay marriage came up and what saddened me the most was hearing one gentleman say 'My partner and I have been together for 50 years...it would be nice to be able to have a wedding while we're still young enough to enjoy the reception'.
While he said it with a weary smile, it struck me as sad that this couple can't have what all other straight couples can have.
Posted by: Calichick at January 10, 2005 02:52 PMyeah, I guess overall my conclusion hasn't changed. I think these other arguments like the liberatarian ones are good supplemental arguments, but that what it really comes down to is defending homosexuality itself. All of our collective efforts have to be compatible with moving the center of the American comfort level to one that is more comfortable with homosexuality itself. And I guess I just don't think that the folks that are saying, "no, it's okay to believe homosexuality is a moral ill!" are really helping with that.
Stories like yours are good defenses of homosexuality. No one is flawless. Just normal people trying to love.
I think you are both leaps ahead of most and the key to getting what we think is right is probably to make people feel comfortable with it in stages. Eventually, the majority will be enlightened and believe that homosexuality is just as acceptable as heterosexuality and gay marriage (or civil unions) is the same regardless of sexual disposition. I do agree that the more gays live their lives openly, the faster society will learn to accept their gayness.
Posted by: Abby at January 10, 2005 11:37 PMThink of the "you don't have to like homosexuality, but support gay marriage anyway" is a lot like free speech issues.
I don't like Fred Phelps. He's a homophobic shithead. I don't like the KKK. I don't like a lot of people and the things they say, but their right to say them is fundamental, no matter how distasteful I might find it. I'd fight for their right to say whatever hateful things they wanted because equal protection under the law isn't just for things and people we like. It's for everyone.
You might not like homosexuals just like you don't like members of the KKK, but they both have rights, and ask MLK said, an injustice anywhere is an injustice everywhere. The infringement of rights is a creeping process and we must always fight to ensure that all can enjoy the freedoms we have come to take for granted.
Posted by: Ben at January 16, 2005 03:44 AMBen, I think that's probably the crux of what I'm stuck on. Yes, that should be the argument. That argument should be enough. But I'm not sure I believe any longer that that argument is enough in America. I don't think it's enough to say "vote for it because of equal rights!" anymore, because until we find a really great way to re-educate everyone about the importance of equal rights, I think the kind of rote equal rights mantra we chant is a losing argument. It's lost meaning to the right. They don't see the linkage between protecting equal rights, and feeling protected themselves.