Anti-interracial vs. Anti-same sex

October 10, 2008

A common statement that pops up in the same-sex marriage debate is the fact the current arguments being used against legalizing same-sex marriage are the exact same ones used against legalizing interracial marriage a few decades ago.

Many “one-man, one-woman” individual rolls their eyes at hearing this over and over again. “That’s illogical,” they say, “Those who were against interracial marriage were clearly wrong because they were against opposite-sex couples that fit into the definition of marriage. Same-sex couples don’t fit into the definition of marriage. There is no comparison between the two issues at all. ”

(To me this sounds like they’re saying “interracial marriages are okay because they aren’t same-sex”, which is weird — it has nothing to do with interracial marriage being right or wrong and everything to do with same-sex marriages being wrong. By the same logic, couldn’t you then argue that “same-sex marriages are okay because they aren’t incestuous”?)

What they should be saying is “That’s illogical. We only know that those who were against interracial marriage were wrong because all the things that they said would happen, didn’t happen. That’s how we know they were wrong. But all the things we’re saying will happen if same sex couples can get married. And no, it doesn’t matter that we have no more proof of this than they did.”

For me, I completely see the comparison. (well, duh) People were against interracial marriage not because it was honestly wrong or unnatural or against god or unhealthy for society — they were against it because they were afraid of those things being true. They were afraid that society would collapse, that god would punish us, that it was wrong and unnatural. Why should we, as a society and a species, trust that those against same-sex marriage aren’t just acting out of fear and ignorance? At the very least, they should find some new arguments.

Anyway, an intensive (read: 5 minute) Google search turned up a PDF comparing arguments made against interracial marriage, for anyone interesting in seeing the similarities. The PDF link itself goes to a dead page (here it is, in case it comes alive again or works for someone else), so I copy/pasted it here from the Google cache.

Among the obvious, this really shows how our language has changed over the years.

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments Off | Uncategorized | Tagged: | Permalink
Posted by admin

Getting Gay Married

October 3, 2008

Let’s talk Prop 8. I’m sure most of you know, but as a refresher; Prop 8 is the measure to get gay marriage banned in California.

As a woman in a committed relationship with another woman who wants to make said commitment legally recognized, I will be voting No on Prop 8. This has less to do with things like taxes and health insurance and everything to do with things like being able to protect each other and any children we might have in times of crises.

But the tax benefits and legal acknowledgment of our union helps too.

When people argue against something that, to me, so obviously represses or infringes upon the happiness of others for no good reason, all I can think to myself is “they can’t understand what it feels like to be on the other side. They can’t know the real reasons why this is so badly wanted.” But if that is the case, there has to be something they do believe. Some reason that is “good enough for them”. I don’t think all of the people who want to vote yes on Prop 8 who do so out of hate — mostly it’s just fear.

Fear of what? Religion is a big part of it, but I don’t think it’s all, as I’ve met agnostics against gay marriage. (I have yet to meet an atheist against it, though, which I think says something.)

In the nature of understanding what my opponents are thinking in the same-sex marriage debate, I visited one of the “Yes on Prop 8″ websites and explored a couple of the articles linked there.

There was one particular article that caught my attention and I will link here when I get home and find the link again, so I’ll be citing my sources like a good little researcher.

The article was a point-by-point break down against the usual Pro-Gay Marriage points. It was well written, mostly non-secular, and well informed.

It was also one of the few times that I’ve seen the sheer depths of someone’s prejudice shining through even though they aren’t directly acknowledging it. He didn’t say that it was wrong to be gay or wrong for homosexuals to form long-lasting, loving relationships with each other — just as long as it wasn’t acknowledged as being equal to heterosexual marriage, because that would completely undermine civilization as we know it.

How, exactly, same-sex marriage would do that boiled down to two apparently interconnected fears:

1) It would imply that mothers and fathers are interchangeable when it comes to raising children.
2) It would imply that marriage is a social construct, not an act of natural design.

Read the rest of this entry »

1 Comment | Uncategorized | Tagged: | Permalink
Posted by admin