So, Barack Obama came out in support of same-sex marriage...and I'm conflicted.
Before you freak out, it's not in the way you think. I'm a huge supporter of Barack Obama, and I'm an equally huge supporter of same-sex marriage rights. I have many dear friends who happen to be homosexuals, and the fact that they are denied the rights that are routinely taken for granted by heterosexual people is something I consider just fucking appalling.
Which brings me back to President Obama. Why am I not overjoyed that he finally spoke about his support for same-sex marriage?
Well, for one thing, he "unequivocally" supported same-sex marriage way back in 1996 (that's 16 years ago, a time when I was still embarrassingly uncomfortable around homosexuals...because I was a stupid 16 year old). I've always considered him to be a supporter of gay rights, even when he didn't just come right out and say so.
Also, in my mind, he didn't "say so" because it has not been politically expedient to say such things aloud. So he just skirted the issue, and became a "civil union states right" kind of dude. It was unfortunate.
I'm not upset with him for masking his true beliefs for the sake of political expediency (I'm not crazy about it, but I still really love the guy). What I'm upset about is the fact that something being so fucking "common sense" as supporting same-sex marriage has been viewed as a political liability for the last 16 years.
I mean...I don't get it. I really don't. I don't understand the idea that there is some untouchable "sanctity of marriage." I don't understand what harm could come from allowing same-sex marriage.
How could same-sex marriage, in any conceivable way, be viewed as a threat to family, heterosexual marriage, morality, or a person's right to worship whatever the hell god they want to (so long as it doesn't harm anyone else)?
Marriage is not sacred. It's one of the least sacred things in the world, and it's never been truly sacred. Throughout most of human history, marriage has been viewed as more of a "financial transaction" than the modern view of marriage meaning "love and companionship." It's been a male-dominated preceding for thousands of years, and monogamy is a relatively new phenomenon.
If marriage is so sacred, why is divorce legal? Why is adultery legal? People talk about the definition of marriage clearly defined in the Bible (between a man and a woman, 1 Corinthians 7:2-3)...but they forget about some other parts that discuss marriage. Like the law where, if a man rapes a woman, he must pay the woman's father and marry the victim (Deuteronomy
22:28-29).
That's traditional marriage, in a literal, biblical sense. It was a financial transaction. A raped woman was damaged goods, so that's why the rapist had to marry her. Sorry, rapist...but them's the rub. Sorry rape-ee, but it's better than never getting married, right?
Of course, society has evolved past that way of thinking (for the most part). Forcing a rapist to marry his victim is ridiculous, just like how the concept of owning slaves (Leviticus 25:44-46) is ridiculous, and the idea that you must cut off a woman's hand if she stops a fight between her husband and another man by squeezing the other man's testicles (Deuteronomy 25:11-12) is ridiculous.
There are many "sacred" laws in the Bible that are, frankly, ridiculous. For those that are curious, check out The Year of Living Biblically: One Man's Humble Quest to Follow the Bible as Literally as Possible to see just how many Biblical laws are routinely ignored. You can borrow my copy, if you want it. It's a very fair-minded examination of the Bible that shows people tend to quote very selectively (as I have, admittedly, just done like crazy in this blog entry).
Sorry, I'm getting distracted. I realize most of my Christian friends and family are not hard-line "Bible Literalists," so me quoting these verses is entirely beside the point for the vast majority of the good, happy, fun-loving, open-minded Christians folk out there. I apologize for those cheap shots I was taking. Yay God!
But at the same time, know that I will not accept someone opposing gay marriage simply because "it's in the Bible," or that it "goes against the Christian faith and morality." Unless you're avoiding shellfish or clothes made from two different fabrics, you cannot make that claim without sounding hypocritical.
Because you know who hated hypocrites? Some dude named Jesus (Matthew 7:1-5).
Enough of that. No more religion talk. Where was I?
Obama. Okay. So, the point is, I'm glad he's finally come out and expressed the sentiments most people knew he held all along. I'm not doing backflips or anything, but it's a step in the right direction. It was a brave thing to do, but the fact that supporting same-sex marriage qualifies as "bravery" is just fucking ridiculous to me..
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment