Sunday, October 12, 2008

More Rainbow Flags Coming to Connecticut

So a Connecticut court has made a rational decision. People may not be discriminated against. It seems simple. But people have all sorts of emotional and/or religious issues that tend to cloud things. Some folks will harp on and on about the "sanctity of marriage", which I find a bit ridiculous. It's a social institution like many others. It has undergone many changes over the centuries with many definitions. Even now it means different things to different people in different traditions, even within those traditions. But the religious nuts just can't get over the "between a man and a woman" thing because of one line in the Bible. (Q: Which topic has more coverage in the Bible, homosexuality or how you should treat your slaves? A: Guess. And it isn't even close.)

"Marriage is about children." Well, no. Many marriages are childless. I have friends my age who are married and don't want children. Should they not have been allowed to get married? My dad re-married in his late 50s and clearly had no intention of having more children. Should he not have been allowed to marry? Some people are barren. Should they not be allowed to get married? It's a specious and nonsensical argument on its face. It doesn't take a genius to refute it. But they still trot it out. It's the only semi-logical thing they can hang it on.

Take these people. They claim that their arguments against gay marriage aren't biblical but biological. What the hell difference does that make? It's still discriminatory. The fact still remains that many married people will never have children and they shouldn't have to in order to enter into a legal contract. Should people have to pledge to have children before they are allowed a marriage license? Should they have to take a fertility test? Should divorce be illegal because the whole point is to have one male and one female parent in the house at all times? Should Lyle the Effeminate Heterosexual not be allowed to procreate?

Listen, whatever your church and you want to do is up to your church and you. But the state does not take a position on religious matters. The state does not take a position on "biological" matters, if that's what you want to call it. The state has pieces of paper that people can sign and enter into a legally binding contract. The state does not care if you love your spouse. The state does not care if you have children. The state does not care if you feed each other Cocoa Puffs while having sex in your laundry room. The state simply does not care. You sign the piece of paper and then when the other person dies you get their money. That is all the state cares about. It's a legal contract and the state may not discriminate in who gets to make a contract with whom.

Have fun discriminating in your church. It's perfectly legal. But it's perfectly illegal for the state to do it. 3 down, 47 to go.

3 comments:

Kizz said...

"The state does not care if you feed each other Cocoa Puffs while having sex in your laundry room."

That sentence makes me want to get married.

Mrs. Chili said...

See? This is what I love about you.

I just said that the other day: Three down, forty-seven to go!

Ali said...

Hear, hear!

Although I can't stand Cocoa Puffs. Can mine be Cinnamon Life instead?