|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
Serious question for those against gay marriage. | by Snate | 2009-04-15 12:37:15 |
| M'kay, let's look at some different arguments... |
by jdelphiki |
2009-04-15 14:49:49 |
...but before we do, this proviso...
I DO NOT BELIEVE GAY MARRIAGE IS WRONG OR SHOULD BE STOPPED!!
For those who choose to respond (or to judge me otherwise based on the arguments I raise in this post), please remember that the following arguments do not necessarily represent the views of the management of jdelphiki or any of his subsidiaries. ;) I'm not even positing this ideas to be openly picked apart, per se (in part because I won't likely have time to discuss them), but just as different angles to an illogical notion.
Moving right along...
We hear a lot about people who oppose gay marriage because of their religious beliefs, but I've heard of...or thought of on my own...other possible qualms that folks might have or explanations for their stance on gay marriage. Some of these I've brought up before, some I haven't, so I apologize for any idea redundancy I might inflict here.
1. First, the religion argument (from a slightly different angle). The institution of marriage...as currently sanctioned by the US government...is seen by many as a religious institution. Not *all* government-sanctioned marriages pass through a church, but for many of the folks who *do* see marriage as a religious institution see it as a holy institution between the people involved and their god.
With gay marriage, these folks might see their institution compared or, perhaps worse to them, *equated* to a relationship that they consider holy. Let's try an analogy...
Say that a guy went to college for four years to become a computer programmer. Out of college, he landed a job and worked hard for years to keep his skills relevant and to maintain his marketability. With 20 years of wide-ranging experience, he finds the computer job market flooded with people who call themselves computer programmers, but who don't have degrees, don't have experience, and who work for half of what he's making. He's not likely to enjoy these folks, even though what they're doing in their employment efforts aren't directly affecting him.
But they actually *are* affecting him because they're devaluing what it means to be a computer programmer. It hits the guy on a personal level because his self-image as a programmer is based deeply on the hard work he did to become who he was. It hits him on a financial level because his value as a programmer drops as the market becomes flooded with (what he sees as) cheap copies of himself (the presumed *real* thing). What do you suppose he'll do?
Should he ignore them because the marketplace has changed an 20-year, heavy-experience programmers are seen as being replaceable (or, let's say, *equated* to) the cheap workers? Or is he likely to push for, or support, stricter hiring rules within the industry so that the differences between him and the others is better defined and highlighted?
With gay marriage, I think a lot of folks see things this way...or perhaps feel this way even if they don't really understand why. They see gay marriage as a "cheap copy" of the "real thing" and so they support (as we saw in California) legislation that makes clearer the distinction for them.
Calling it "hatred" or "bigotry" is ineffective because they don't see it in terms of hate/don't hate. They see it as how it affects *them*, in a predictably egocentric manner. Much the same way that people who try to define their beliefs as being hateful or bigoted are using their own egocentricity to "explain" behavior that they don't see as making sense.
2. A different argument that I've seen (and I think was used in this discussion) is the notion that "gay marriage is based on sex". I tend to see this as a misnomer to a more general statement that folks are trying to say: "as a personal identity, homosexuality is based on sexual identity".
That, in my book, doesn't make this argument much sounder, but I at least understand what the folks who use this one are trying to say.
For instance, I am white, middle-aged (I suppose), a computer programmer, a writer, a Protestant Christian who converted to Catholicism, brown-eyed, brown-haired, clumsy (evidently), and hypoglycemic. Just for starters. I am also heterosexual, have been married for 24 years and have four kids. If someone asks me what my identity is, I have a *lot* of things I can say.
Sometimes, however, I think people see homosexuals as defining themselves as homosexuals first, ahead of everything else.
Now, that's a flat stereotype that is not in the least an accurate way of describing homosexuals as a subclass of people, but folks who use this argument likely see that stereotype as being more or less true...a distinguishing characteristic.
The problem with believing an invalid sterotype, however, is that it becomes to easy to define (and discard) an entire class of people without seeing beyond the stereotyped characteristics. Same thing happens (I'm sad to say) to those who see those who have qualms about homosexuality as being hateful toward them. Sure there are a lot of "haters" out there...just like there are a lot of folks who define their sexuality above every other form of identity. But the stereotypes are too narrow a way of defining groups of people because they hide the individual behind the wall of perceived ideology.
That's probably enough for now. Food for thought and all that. And remember, these aren't my own viewpoints, just perspectives that I've gathered over the years of watching this topic play itself out in the country and world. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
I was not married in a church. Do *I* threaten the | by Divinar | 2009-04-15 17:07:33 |
|
No idea... | by jdelphiki | 2009-04-15 18:32:38 |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
