Mar. 27th, 2013

cahwyguy: (Default)

Marriage Equalityuserpic=charactureFacebook has turned into a river of red. Everyone is changing their user-pic to a pair of pink equals on a red background, an alteration of the Human Rights Campaign’s standard blue and yellow logo. The advocacy group, which “seeks to improve the lives of LGBT Americans,” has called on its followers to show support for marriage equality by doing this. They’ve followed suit, with all sorts of equal signs on a red background: bacon, matzah, wedding rings, and almost anything you can think of. Those who haven’t changed their Facebook user-pics have often expressed support in other ways, such as status updates.

Yesterday, I was one of those folks. I did what I believed was an innocuous status update in support of marriage equality. Or so I thought, at least. It ended up starting a vigorous discussion back and forth, with over 44 comments being posted (and the discussion was likely not over). So I felt that this morning I should write up my thoughts on the discussion and subject.*

Important Note: This is a statement of my opinion. It is not open for discussion. Got it? Good!

I am in favor of marriage equality. If two (or more) unrelated adult humans, all able to freely consent, wish to form a long-term relationship, I see absolutely no reason why the state shouldn’t recognize that relationship, and accord to it all the legal rights that go with what we call “marriage”: visitation rights, inheritance rights, formal dissolution rules. The odd wording is to cut off any discussion about adults marrying children (I do agree a line must be drawn), relatives marrying close relatives (Again, a line must be drawn, for different reasons), and any nonsense about marrying animals or inanimate objects and that such.

Oh, so you’re worried about children. Specious argument. Has nothing to do with the issue. Many marriages between opposite sexes do not produce children. This is simply about equality under the law for adult relationships. I’ll agree that the ideal is raising a child in a loving household with both a mother and father; but to me, the loving in the household trumps the requirement for the sexes of the parents to be different. If we can’t have the ideal, then we can at least have love.

Oh, so you’re worried about religion. Guess what? I’m not demanding that any religion recognize these marriages. I’m referring to recognition for legal purposes, for those that choose to have the relationships registered with the state. If they want it “blessed by God”, that’s between them and their clergy, and their clergy has every right to refuse. Separation of church and state and all that rot.

Oh, you want to call it something else, but have it equal in every other way. Look, “separate but equal” went out with Jim Crow. Loads and loads of laws refer to marriage and spouses. Changing them to use new terms to make things truly equal will take lots and lots of effort and cost lots and lots of money, just to make the “separate” be really “equal”. It is much easier and cheaper to just call it “marriage” — most importantly, because that’s what it is.

Oh, so homosexuals offend your sensibility and go against “God’s will”. Deal. Everyone offends someone: there are those offended by blacks, by Jews, by (name your group). Luckily, we live in a country that proclaims “liberty and justice for all”. This means that everyone must be equal under the law: irrespective of sex, skin color, religion, sexual orientation, or any other attribute.

So that’s my thought. I’m hoping that soon the Supreme Court will recognize that the societal view on this has shifted, just as it has shifted on interracial marriages and other marriages. Don’t believe me? I suggest you study the history of marriage.

(*: This was written before I got to work; with a final review and post as soon as I arrived and got my tea)

Music: Lorelei (Original Broadway Cast): “Diamonds are a Girls Best Friend”

This entry was originally posted on Observations Along The Road (on cahighways.org) as this entry by cahwyguy. Although you can comment on DW, please make comments on original post at the Wordpress blog using the link below; you can sign in with your LJ, FB, or a myriad of other accounts. There are currently comments on the Wordpress blog. PS: If you see share buttons above, note that they do not work outside of the Wordpress blog.

===> Click Here To Comment <==
(Click Here to Comment)

cahwyguy: (Default)

userpic=frebergToday, while eating my lunch of chicken salad and matzah, I was staring at my list of accumulated articles to see if there was a theme. Suddenly it popped out to me — all of these stories are about people or things that are facing and surviving adversary:

  • Robert Clary. Mention Robert Clary to most people, and they won’t recognize the name. Folks from my generation will — Clary was a popular singer (I have his album singing songs from “Gigi”) and played LaBeau on Hogans Heroes. Clary is also a survivor. The Paris-born Clary spent three years in a concentration camp before making it big in New Faces of 1952, and went on to play a major role in Heroes with fellow Nazi survivors Warner Klemperer and John Banner. For 20 years, Clary has traveled the U.S. and Canada, speaking at schools, colleges and other venues about the horrors of the Holocaust.
  • Margaret Cho. Many folks may be familiar with the comic Margaret Cho, who also had an ABC sitcom many years ago. Cho writes of her experiences going to a Korean spa, and how the traditional women there reacted to her heavily tattooed naked body. In the article, she talks about her tattoos are a mark of her survival: “”These were all women of various sizes and shapes and some, like me, bore the marks of a difficult life. My tattoos represent much of the pain and suffering I have endured. They are part of me, just like my scars, my fat, my eternal struggle with gravity. None of our bodies are ‘perfect’. We live in them. They aren’t supposed to be ‘perfect’. We are just us, perceived flaws and all”
  • Gary Richards. Most people probably don’t recognize Gary Richards. Those in the Bay Area will recognize his pen name: “Mr. Roadshow”. I know Gary because he occasionally tosses a SoCal question my way (and I truly wish the LA Media News Group would have him write a column for the LAMG papers). Gary recently wrote a column about a situation he is being forced to survive: He can’t drive. Gary was just diagnosed with something called Charcot foot, a disease that can cause the bones to deteriorate. No walking or driving for at least 6-8 months. He has to use a walker, and remain immobile as much as possible. This on top of a previous injury: he has been an amputee since age 11, when bone cancer took his left leg above the knee. Especially with Gary’s job, not being able to drive must be incredibly frustrating; I remember when I was laid up with a broken right foot and a good left leg. I’m sure we all with Gary a speedy recovery.
  • Petroleum Mosaic. Our last survivor is not a person but a thing: A mosaic of the petroleum industry in Los Angeles that miraculously survived the destruction of the Wilshire Grand Hotel. The story of how the mosaic was discovered and researched is fascinating.

Music: Sing for Joy (Rabbi Gershom Sizom/Abayudaya Jews of Uganda): “Shema”

This entry was originally posted on Observations Along The Road (on cahighways.org) as this entry by cahwyguy. Although you can comment on DW, please make comments on original post at the Wordpress blog using the link below; you can sign in with your LJ, FB, or a myriad of other accounts. There are currently comments on the Wordpress blog. PS: If you see share buttons above, note that they do not work outside of the Wordpress blog.

===> Click Here To Comment <==
(Click Here to Comment)

Profile

cahwyguy: (Default)
cahwyguy

July 2025

S M T W T F S
   12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags