Pam has a post up about some people in Massachusetts trying to replace the country’s only legal gay marriage with the shibboleth of “civil unions”, through the staging of a Constitutional Convention, no less!
In the comments, one person expressed her outrage:
Why can’t they just fucking LEAVE US ALONE!!!!
What are they so fucking afraid of?! That there will be more and more evidence of NOTHING FUCKING HAPPENING when gay marriage is legalised?!
Congratulations, you are the “Radical” Russ Nail on the Head Award winner for the day. This is EXACTLY the fear.
In my political fight (marijuana decrim) we see it as well. Since Oregon passed medical marijuana in 1998, the business community has been trying like hell (unsuccessfully) to be able to fire medical marijuana patients who pee-test positive for cannabis.
Why? Well, if everyone on the shop floor knows that Granny Glaucoma is a medical marijuana patient, and yet she comes to work every day, is very productive, and never has any safety or quality violations, it exposes the lies of drug testing the non-medical marijuana patients for those phantom concerns.
Similarly, when gays get married and the sky doesn’t fall on straight marriage or child welfare, and there’s no rush of pedophiles, zoophiles, or polyamorous people rushing to demand marriage rights, then the bogeyman of gay marriage ain’t so frightening anymore.
One of the sillier notions for protecting “marriage” was offered by another commenter:
its silly to change a word to make someone happy .at the same time you can consider the union between 2 people of the same sex valid and as valuable as traditional marriage
Which is more of that “let them have Civil Unions” talk — why fight for the word “marriage” if we’ll give you a legal creation with all the same rights anyway? (Why? Here’s why.)
It’s amazing to me to consider that some people believe that the meaning of English words is more important than the civil rights of human beings. As if the meaning of English words don’t ever and shouldn’t ever change (maybe they’re still mad that “gay” doesn’t mean “happy” anymore — that’s so un-“cool”!) “Marriage” for straights and “Civil Unions” for gays is “separate but equal” which is always anything but equal. You don’t want to redefine “marriage”? Fine. Eliminate “marriage” from the civil codes and make all social partnerships — straight or gay — “civil unions”.
The idea that we need to protect a word is so ridiculous to me. What you’re wanting to protect is a linguistic and social way for the uptight homophobic straights to separate their partnership from the filthy gays. “Oh, sure, those boys are ‘civil union’ married, but they’re not ‘married married’ like me and Trudy here.”
I’m a straight married guy. My bond with my wife is the most incredible, sacred thing I’ve ever been a part of. And if Adam & Steve feel the same way toward each other, not only is that fine in my eyes, but for some reason, it doesn’t seem to make me feel less of a bond with my wife.
Oregon just tried to pass a Civil Unions bill to try to grant some legal protection to our gay population in the wake of our heinous anti-gay marriage amendment of 2004. It passed the Senate, it would’ve passed the House, and the Governor would’ve signed it. But the Republican Speaker of the House wouldn’t schedule it for a vote… what was that mantra about “up or down vote” again?
Had that Civil Unions bill passed, my wife and I had plans to get divorced, then join with our lesbian couple friends to get ourselves a civil union. Hey, if it’s really the same as marriage, what do we straight folks have to fear?
Two things I’ll never understand: how a country founded by hemp farmers and based on a Constitution written on hemp paper could prohibit hemp; and why anybody cares so much about who and how other people fuck that they’d go so far as institutionalize discrimination (or even bash and kill) those people.
