If cliché phrases can be tools for the writers, let this be another instance of the rhetoric device:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” -Thomas Jefferson
If you’re an American, you have been indoctrinated with these words and always keep them in the back of your mind. These words, above all others in any of the founder’s literature, express America and American spirit, her hopes, her dreams, and her beliefs. The meaning of these words seems to me to be as self-evident as the truths of which Thomas Jefferson is referring to. All people, no matter the creed, belief, non-violent action, or speech act have the right to live a life in pursuit of happiness and life’s ventures. However, there are some that would twist these words and their meaning to lessen the rights that they enjoy, simply because others are different.
These are some of the arguments for marriage equality:
In response to an argument against gay marriage, I mentioned an argument for the ‘naturalness’ of what we would call ‘gay sex acts.’ I seem to have upset some people, as they felt it was a weak argument. However, it is a sound argument and I will present it again, in a way to define it more for those that may not have understood.
Homo sapiens have the luxury of the evolution adaptation of a rational mind. A rational mind is a mind in which processes of the brain can help humans utilize logical speech acts to express a point or make a decision (whether it be to brush your teeth or stop at a stop-sign).
As far as human beings can understand, we are the only species on Earth that has the mental capacity to make these decisions. No other animal has ever given scientists any indication of holding the capability to reason as humans do.
There can be no disputing the fact that occasionally, human beings act without utilizing the rational-part of the brain. Whether that is positive or negative can be understood by the consequences of the action (if you are an ethical consequentialist).
An action can be considered ‘natural’ if a non-rationally capable animal commits the action because it does not take a rationally-evolved mind to complete the process and decide (for lack of a better word) to perform said action.
Therefore, because gay-sex acts are observed in non-human great apes and sea-dwelling mammals, and are somewhat commonplace in the animal kingdom, the act of gay-sex cannot be considered the ‘choice’ of a deviant lifestyle, as some religious folk may argue, but instead, a natural action performed by an animal (yes, human beings are animals).
I understand that it may sicken some of you to know that human beings are not anointed to be of a higher dominion than other animals. However, we are simply more-well adapted to our environment than many other animals, and coupled with the diet that our ancestors had that increased brain capacity over hundreds of thousands of generations, we are at a point in history in which our minds are the way we observe them to be, not out of a magic-man’s hands, but a natural process. Homosexual acts are a natural action. This argument alone is not enough to put to bed the argument that gays are somehow lesser beings than non-gays, but it is enough to put to be the pseudo-logical idea that homosexuality is ‘unnatural’.
Alive as well is the argument that homosexuals lead harmful lifestyles. While ‘harmful’ can be subjective, the thought is that the transmission of AIDS is good enough to outlaw homosexual acts. However, we now know that AIDS is not a disease that effects only gays, but everyone. The transmission of AIDS is possible with any sexual contact. The harmful lifestyle that is being referred to is now, no longer had exclusive to oppressed gays that are disallowed civil rights that all others have, but now with those non-gays that would choose to lead a promiscuous sexual lifestyles.
This argument is yet another piece of political propaganda used to put gays into a status of sub-human existence. There is no evidence existing of a larger population per capita of gays leading a promiscuous lifestyle than there are of non-gays. However, the number may also significantly drop if marriage equality is obtained.
Floating around in the comments from my last piece, as well as in the lungs in middle-America is the idea that marriage is purely a Judeo-Christian institution. This is simply and easily laid to rest as there are many parts of the world in which love flourishes and Christianity has not tainted the air with its oppressive tyranny. Civil union cannot be hijacked by American Christians and become something that is exclusive to a system of belief that holds no leverage in Politics.
If you are religious and wish to make exclusive the rights of your church, mosque, or synagogue to those that profess to feel exactly the same way that you do, you may do that. However, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and many of the other founders warned future Americans that there would come a time in which religious oppression would attempt to take the rights away from citizens, and safeguarded the Constitution from special-interest groups with that aim.
Denying the rights of civil unions to people is a form of minority discrimination. Those of us that are fortunate to have been born as white, male, or middle/upper class in a time of American history that is much kinder to minorities do not understand the pain, mental and physical that women, blacks, Hispanics, middle-easterners, and any person that we see as different than ‘us’ have endured. This is the land of the free and is open to any that wish to hold the same rights that we find to be ‘self-evident’ among all people.
We are not different. Whether you ‘believe’ that gays are leading a deviant lifestyle, or you think that those around you are going to a terrible place for not believing in the same God as you (and being rude to you in the line at Subway), or you just think that brown people are dumb, your opinion has no bearing in government and you cannot shatter the hopes and dreams of a nation and its people of holding rights that should be held.
We are not different. I may not like the fact that I live in a country in which a belief structure that I find to be highly-harmful to liberty has flourished, but I support your right to follow it. I hope only in time that rhetoric and logic may help those in shackles that would like to be released. My distaste for such religious institutions is not grounds for legislation to prohibit those from peacefully worshiping the sky.
We are not different. I live with the presupposition that people in love with members of the same sex as them are not actors simply pretending to piss you and your God off. My position is based on our Constitution and scientific evidence as precedent for the way I live my life, which is one to support all people and their private actions.
The final part of the Same-Sex marriage piece will be posted later this week. As always, leave comments and discuss among yourselves the arguments and formulate your opinions justly.