Banning Gay Marriage Is a Really Stupid Idea
John Scalzi notes: "Today is the 25th anniversary of the identification of a mysterious syndrome attacking gay men, which would in time be called AIDS. President George Bush is marking the day by calling for an amendment to the Constitution of the United States that would bar same-sex marriage, despite the fact that there are currently thousands of U.S. citizens who are in legal same-sex marriages."
The United States is not a Christian Commonwealth. Despite what many people believe, freedom of religion really is one of the most important freedoms of our country. Many people would like to see Christianity made law, prayer in schools made mandatory and intelligent design taught as science. But that's not what our country is about, and most people realize it.
So why do we have such a problem with gay marriage? Why do people want it banned politically? Law, that odd political form of morality, is about freedoms. It is about ordering society, and about ensuring that individuals are not unfairly taken advantage of. It is not about forcing your own (or even the majority's) personal morality on everyone else.
Yes, that's what the Christian Right's problem with gay marriage is about. There is no reason (aside from wishful thinking) to believe that it is detrimental to society. The only reason Christianity bans it is because of a few passages in the bible. (see Romans 1:24-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9) And how much more does Jesus rail against the Pharisees and their false purity? How much more does Jesus berate them for looking down on those people involved in small sins. How can today's Christians repeat their sins of hate?
When you consider the issue sensibly, you realize a few things. Homosexuality cannot be banned simply because it is "unnatural." There are numerous examples in the animal kingdom of indulging in homosexual acts. You could probably classify living in 30-story high-rise apartments as "unnatural," but you don't, beceause it's incredibly practical. Nor can homosexuality be banned because it is "detrimental to society"; there is no good evidence of this. The only way to justify an antipathy to homosexuality is with an appeal to the Bible. To have faith that God got it right (if you're sure about the infallibility of the Bible, which is another matter). In any event, the issue is turned into a purely religious one. Therefore, it has no place in the political sphere.
So, Christians. Think twice before supporting laws and amendments that cross over the line dividing the rational and the religious. Someday, Christianity might be in the minority, and then you will be very glad that you supported that separation. (This is just about the pansiest argument possible. Feel free to consider those weightier philosophical arguments that are so much more meaningful.)
Personally, I think that marriage as a religious institution ought to be entirely different from marriage as a political institution. Churches should be able to give marriage certificates to whomever they wish, however they wish. If people wish to engage in homosexuality, or polygamy, that's their own decision. Political law should only step in when something is proven to be detrimental to society and requires intervention. That's the only solution to the issue, as far as I can see it.
The problem that those against gay marriage would have against this is that then anyone would be able to get marriage certificates by going to a particular church. What happens to the sanctity of marriage then? Well, Mr. Bigot, you can carry your own soiled sanctity of marriage around with you in a dirty pocket, and you can look down on those heathenous homosexual couples all you want. The rest of us can see that you don't really want sanctity of marriage: You want control over marriage. And we're not going to let that happen.