06 November 2009

The "Ragin" Gay Marriage debate

with a twist (it's old)

[Written on 22SEP09, and discovered in the "Drafts" folder this evening. I know, I know: blog it whilst it's fresh.]

so anyway, Ragin' Dave of Four Right Wing Wackos fame is having a debate with one of his readers over the whole "gay marriage" dealio. Dave is firmly on the side of science, whilst Mr.Sellers has taken the "cultural" approach. Guess who is winning? Do go read the whole thing.

As an aside, I agree with Ragin' Dave's position on the subject, but I Just.Don't.Care.Enough. about the issue to be passionate about it. That said, I have a view of the whole "gay marriage" issue that's a little different from Dave's and Mr.Sellers.

I've often wondered why the "civil union" option was considered just right out amongst the gay marriage proponents. It seems perfectly plausible to me.

Define "marriage". To most people, it conjures up visions of a couple, at the alter, swearing vows to each other before a preacher / priest / what-ever. In short, a union "blessed" by the church.

But let's look at what you have to do to get "married": first, you have to go to your local government and get a "Marriage License", an approval from the civil authorities to get hitched. Second (for most folks) you need to find a member of the clergy to perform (sanctify?) the marriage.

Let me offer a personal example: me and TheMissus™. We chose to be wed in a small private ceremony by a Justice of the Peace, as neither of us are church-going types (TheMissus™ is of the atheist vein; and as for me, I'm a recovering Southern Baptist and just don't go near the stuff). By the popular definition, we're not married, but have a civil union: endorsed by the State, but not "blessed" by the church.

So why is the "civil union" option so objectionable to the proponents of "gay marriage"? Hell if I know. Legally, TheMissus™ and I are just as "married" as if we were wed by Cardinal Glick in front of the Buddy Christ statue. Why this kind of "civil union" is not good enough for the "gay marriage" crowd, I'll never know.

more soon


At 11 November, 2009 20:35, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You bring up a good point, one I hadn't thought of before.
My head's thinking now!
Great post!


Post a Comment

<< Home