Saturday 25 May 2013

marriage

The question of whether or not gay couples should be allowed to marry understandably agitates people and on the outset it seems like a complex, intricate, sensitive issue.

I used to think so too, though having never intended to marry in the first place, I never really quite saw what the fuss was about. But as this has made its way to the fore of political debate, I've come to realise that while sensitive - religion, tradition and values being so deeply involved - it is anything but complex or even intricate. It is, in fact, super simple.

Gay marriage is purely a legal issue, and one of how you define 'marriage'. Religion, no matter how important it is to you, doesn't come into it: there are thousands of different religions and one person's faith is another person's superstition. So no matter how dear you hold your beliefs, they are, when it comes to law making, irrelevant.

That then leaves the traditional definition of marriage. Well, the traditional definition of marriage used to have wives down as the property of their husbands, at some points in history several at a time. We've evolved from that. So tradition, too, when it comes to it, is irrelevant.

What matters then is simply the principle of equality before the law. And that means: question answered. The idea that gay marriage could in some way 'diminish' or 'cheapen' or 'weaken' the institution of marriage is absurd and insulting. Gay people are people. If you say that their getting married has an adverse effect on you or your marriage, you are simply saying that they are not as human as you. Think that through and you come to the conclusion: gay marriage is a no brainer.

If anyone's still unsure, I've drawn up a helpful flow chart:

the gay marriage question



















sebastian's website   sebastian on facebook  sebastian on twitter