Political Stances #2

Saturday, March 15, 2008 at 12:00 AM

I haven’t forgotten about writing up stances and justifications for political issues. Even if it means only posting on one issue at a time, I promise I will continue to post my political stances for additional important political issues (such as education, foreign policy, economic policy, and the environment) in upcoming posts.

Gay/Lesbian Marriage – From a moral standpoint, I’m not sure how I feel about homosexuality. I have several good friends who are gay. Their sexual orientation doesn’t really faze me. I am happy in my heterosexual marriage. As far as I’m concerned other people’s sexuality is their own business.

There are legitimate reasons to oppose from moral standpoint. Several bible versus are fairly direct at condemning homosexuality. On the other hand, there are versus in the bible that command stoning disobedient children, prohibit eating pork, and prohibit wearing clothes with more than one type of fiber. I find it strange that fundamentalists focus so intensely on homosexuality. If homosexuality were the biggest threat to faith, I find it strange that Christ had nothing to say about homosexuality one way or another (although when he referred to marriage he did refer to it in terms of man and woman). However, Christ had plenty to say about loving one’s neighbor and not picking specs out of someone else’s eye while ignoring large planks in one’s own eyes. I’m not as familiar with the specific texts and tenants of other faiths as I probably should be, but I do know that Christianity is not the only religion which has prohibitions on homosexuality. I completely respect peoples right to take and express a moral stance against homosexuality. However, hateful harassment and violence against others based on sexual orientation should not be tolerated.

Apart from religious beliefs, I can’t see good social reason to prohibit gay marriage (whether it is called marriage or called civil unions). The religious right conservatives seem to act like if there is no homosexual marriage, there will be no homosexuality – which is ridiculous. Gay and lesbian people will continue to have relationships whether they are legally allowed to marry or not. (Whether morally wrong or not) it seems to me that promoting stable monogamous relationships vs. promiscuity in both heterosexual and homosexual relationships is in the best interests of society in terms of preventing the spread of AIDS and other STDs, as well as creating more stable home environments.

One difficulty is “marriage” is somewhat of a loaded word and concept. There are two quite separate aspects to the word marriage. When Jeremy and I were married on August 28, 1999 we were given a legal certificate from the State of Nebraska binding us together in a legal contract with certain rights and responsibilities. The State of Nebraska is not concerned with religious aspects of marriage, and many people decide to legally marry with a justice or the peace without religion playing a role in the marriage process. Many people (myself included) also view marriage as an important sacrament, with significant religious or spiritual implications. The paper from the state has very little to do with the sacrament or religious nature of our marriage.

Some religious denominations have no moral qualms with homosexual marriage. If they give spiritual blessing to homosexual questions that is their decision. Many denominations do have strong moral qualms with homosexuality. I strongly feel that no religious official should ever be legally forced to perform marriage ceremonies or give religious acceptance or blessing to homosexual marriage in violation to their religious convictions or the doctrines of their particular religious denomination. But as I mentioned earlier I see no reason why the government should deny homosexual couples the same legal protections as heterosexual couples.

I’ve never really understood the entire “defense of marriage” argument. If gay couples were allowed to marry or have civil unions, traditional heterosexual marriages would still be allowed and would still be the norm. I can’t see how having a gay couple next door would affect my marriage to Jeremy one way or another. If having a gay couple living next door somehow threatens someone’s marriage, I think they need to focus on your their own marriage and should seriously seek some marital counseling! What about children? Due to purely biological reasons homosexual relationships don’t produce children without adoption, or medical intervention. I do think it is ideal for children to be raised in a “traditional” family with a stable relationship with both female and male parent role models (call me old-fashioned, or closed-minded). However loving and stable partnership with two parents of the same sex may be a better environment for kids than abusive or dysfunctional heterosexual marriages or being raised by single parents (not that there aren’t many excellent and caring single moms and dads out there).

Homosexuals in the Military – I don’t think there should be specific prohibitions against homosexuals serving in the military, especially since the military seems to want to increase enrollment and recruiting. The current don’t ask/don’t tell policy is somewhat ridiculous. There have been many men and women both heterosexual and homosexual who have served their country with honor and distinction. Sexuality should not affect the job. Sexual harassment or sexual assault should not be tolerated for either heterosexuals or homosexuals in the military.