The Wall Street Journal’s “Question of the Day” for February 8th was “Should gay marriage be legal in the United States?” For some reason, it appeared in the side bar today, so I voted and commented. As of 10 AM, March 6th, the vote is 53.9% to 46.1%, with 2975 votes for “Yes” and 2540 “No” votes.
The comments are typical of these debates: opposition to homosexual marriage is presented as something instigated by people who oppose it due to their hatred of homosexuals, their bigotry, and their narrow religious beliefs.
First, the people who started this “battle” are the ones who want to change the law and continue to push by filing appeal after appeal against laws in existence in order to change the law and the definition of marriage. Proposition 8 in 2008 in California and the Texas Defense of Marriage Constitutional Amendment (DOMA) in 2005 were in response to Court cases such as the one in Massachusetts declaring that it was unconstitutional in that State to define marriage as between one man and one woman.
Second, opposition to changing the law and definition of marriage does not require that we hate anyone the same way that we hate child abuse.
There is a wide range of sexual attraction among humans, but the norm is opposite-sex-attraction (OSA) between physical adults.
And then, there are the basic facts of anatomy and physiology.
While biology is not destiny, it has consequences: form follows function. In fact, the male and female sexual organs are complimentary in purpose and function. That function involves one set – the complementary organs of one man and one woman.
There is no parallel between the form of a water fountain or seats on a bus and the race of the user as there is between the male and female form and sexual function. There certainly is no physiological reason to discriminate between same-race and interracial marriage.
If you want to stick with the cerebral, there are also problems in declaring that same-sex-attraction (SSA) is equivalent to OSA. The history of legalized or non-criminalized homosexual marriage is less than 20 years old. There is much more history to support interracial and polygamous marriage. There’s no logical reasoning that if the definition of marriage is changed to include homosexual marriages, that these won’t be legalized, too.