The Gate City Gatekeeper says he has had enough conversation about North Carolina's proposed Defense of Marriage Act. He ran out of arguments, so he punted.
"It is unfortunate that no common ground can be found, but this is one more example of the polarization of American Life..."
I think Gate is wrong on this. There is plenty of common ground on this subject if both sides will give up what they consider to be their moral high ground.
I have no trouble with gay marriage, I know and love too many committed gay couples to consider denying them the same civil rights as my Jinni and I enjoy. And as I commented over at Doug Clark's place, I have my children to consider also...
"...At this point in my children's lives, I have no way of knowing which way their sex lives will ultimately swing. But if it turns out that any of them are homosexual, I wish for them every benefit and happiness that Jinni and I currently enjoy because we happen to be heterosexual... If you have children, consider your position on this carefully. You may get what you wish for and eventually regret it."
On the other hand, I understand why many people oppose gay marriage. They find the sexual union of same sex partners to be abhorrent and immoral. Chapter and verse are readily cited as to why homosexuality might be considered an abomination before God. Understandably, people want to forward their deeply held beliefs and make efforts to convert as many people as possible to their way of thinking/worshipping. It is just the Christian way.
Gay couples can get married in North Carolina right now. All they have to do is go to one of the many churches who will perform the ceremony for gay couples. As soon as the 'I'do's' are said, they are married in the eyes of that church's God. No constitutional amendment will ever stop this practice on the part of "activist preachers". It is a religious matter and thankfully, the state can't touch it. In the eyes of the state, however, a married gay couple is still comprised of two single citizens.
All these couples want are the same civil rights afforded to my Jinni and I. They want health care extended to their life partner, they want to be able to make life or death decisions for their 'spouse' in the event of dire illness, they want both partners to have an equal voice in the lives of their children, they want to be able to file the more beneficial "married filing jointly" tax return - in other words - they want equal protections and benefits under the laws of our land like our Constitution promises.
So here, hopefully, is your common ground.
Let's drop the word 'marriage' from the governmental vocabulary and substitute the phrase 'civil union' in its place -for everyone. I could really care less if I am considered 'married' in the eyes of the state. Marriage is a matter of love and commitment and ceremony and I have all of that regardless of what the state does or says. What I want, and get, from the state are certain rights and financial arrangements that my state-recognized commitment to my partner affords me. My marriage is a religious construct, my civil union is the providence of government. Two separate things.
Get the government out of the marriage business altogether and put it in the business of providing equality for all of its citizens. Hopefully that is some common ground we can all agree to... can't we?
1:34:31 PM  
|