Originally published in the September 2009 issue of The Gothic Times
New Jersey City University, Jersey City, New Jersey–All of the far-left influence in America would make one think that legalizing gay marriage would be as easy as tuning in to The Colbert Report. However, in November of 2008, California voters approved Proposition 8, a referendum revoking the state’s earlier decision to permit gay marriage.
Following Prop 8, Carrie Prejean, Miss California USA, was ridiculed for defending her stance against gay marriage in the 2009 Miss USA pageant.
Blogger Perez Hilton, the pageant judge whose question she answered in this case, called Prejean a “dumb b*tch” in a blog posting afterwards and also admitted that Prejean lost the crown due to “how she responded.” But Donald Trump, part owner of the Miss Universe organization, defended her right to speak up for her beliefs.
In a USA Today/Gallup Poll conducted in May 2009, 1,015 adults nationwide were asked the question: “Do you think marriages between same-sex couples should or should not be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages?” ?” The results: 3% voted “Unsure,” 40% said they “Should” be recognized, 57% attested, no, they “Should Not.”
The disagreement isn’t so clear-cut, though, as shown through the use of the term “civil union,” a legally recognized union of same-sex couples that grants similar rights to those of marriage – a compromise in the debate. On February 19, 2007, New Jersey was the third state to grant gay couples civil unions, after Vermont and Connecticut.
Being gay is wrong! I’m joshing, of course, but those who oppose gay marriage are often tagged as dense homophobes lacking any cogent speech. The truth is that I have gay friends and would never insult someone because of their background or lifestyle, unless, of course, it’s of a harmful nature.
The principal reason I oppose gay “marriage” is because it alters the definition of what many Americans believe is solely the union between a man and a woman. I don’t oppose gay couples having benefits in a civil union, but I do oppose having their unions called “marriages,” which I believe are covenants between a man and a woman.
Let’s suppose an activist group began fighting for the right to call what one puts on his or her foot (a sock) the same name as what one puts on his or her hand (a glove). After they gather folks to campaign for their cause, proper legal procedures would ensue, but the opposition would argue that redefining a term, known as one thing for generations, is a futile effort. One cannot call a sock a “glove” because the redefinition would be improper.
The same goes with the term “marriage.” If a couple of the same sex wishes to be united, the union should not be named “marriage.”
Gay marriage advocates claim that homosexuals are being stripped of a “fundamental right.” Equal rights aren’t special rights. I would’ve supported women’s suffrage, and I see racism as egregious, but gender and race are born attributes and merit equal rights. However, there is no solid evidence for a gay gene. Some sociologists argue that the way in which one is nurtured has a causal relationship on one’s sexual orientation. And so, laws should not change over lifestyle choices.
Equal rights, I support. Special rights, based on lifestyle choices, I don’t. The difficulty in legalizing special rights reveals itself in New Jersey’s use of civil unions instead of gay marriage. It seems as though legalizing gay marriage, with all of its opposition, will be as difficult as getting Steven Colbert fans to watch The O’Reilly Factor.