So what's the problem? Well, in 2009, Chick-fil-A donated nearly $2 million to anti-gay groups, according to the Huffington Post. Earlier this year, change.org released a statement that Chick-fil-A still has deep ties to the anti-gay movement. "We do not accept homosexual couples," wrote WinShape Foundation, Chick-fil-A's "charitable arm."
As a final paper for my public opinion class, I wrote an analysis of the same-sex marriage debate. I pride myself on my ability to play devil's advocate, to argue both sides (when needed). People should be able to make their own decisions instead of relying on the decisions handed to them by their parents or society or their church.
But when I wrote the paper, I was horrified by many of the arguments against gay marriage. "Legitimate" arguments. Ones that people actually argue, and not something silly that a comedian says. Arguments that people actually believe. A list of them, found in "Same Sex Marriage: Focus on the Facts" by Sean Cahill, is below:
- Allowing gay couples to marry will damage or destroy the institution of marriage
- Gay relationships are unhealthy
- Gay relationships are unsafe
- Because gay people and their relationships are unhealthy and destructive, they are a drain on the economy
- Gay parenting is a looming threat that endangers children and society
- Gay parents are more likely to abuse their children
- Gay men are more likely to be pedophiles
- Gay marriage is a threat to religious freedom; religions will be forced to recognize and sanction gay unions
- Gay rights advances are akin to terrorism
- Same-sex marriage signals the breakdown of society and is part of a satanic plot to destroy civilization.
During a conversation with a friend of mine about this topic recently, I had a grand revelation. The people who believe this will always believe this. If someone firmly believes 2+2=5, you can never persuade them otherwise. You can argue forever, you can present all evidence to the contrary, and you will never win. So why do I bother?
I bother because it's right. I bother because there are humans being unjustly treated. How can we sit idly by and allow this abuse to happen?
The unjust treatment of blacks and women throughout history are events that are now thought of as being absurd. How could women and blacks not vote a century ago? Why would people be against suffrage and civil rights? Of course, sexism and racism still exist - but it is largely thought of as being normal for women and blacks to vote. And yet, marriage rights for every U.S. citizen is an abomination.
A friend of mine posted this link on Facebook the other day. It made me laugh that someone would argue that same-sex marriage is equal to trying to marry your dog or your toasted. But how sad that someone truly believes this?
Many argue against homosexuality based on the teachings of the Bible. "Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable" (Leviticus 18:22). But what about "God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8)? What about Romans 13:8 - "Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law"? Is it right, as a Christian, to remember to hate, and not to love? Wasn't that the point of Jesus coming and dying for our sins?
Jesus healed a leper, who was rejected by his community, outcast from society, and considered "unclean." In John 8:7 he saved an adulterous woman from a horrible fate by saying "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." This is the mantra by which I live my life. Who are we to judge, if we do not wish to be judged for our own indiscretions?
This isn't a religious rant. This is a commentary on society. How can society say that being gay is a choice when homosexuals are persecuted, hated, and killed? I support homosexual rights, but after seeing the way society treats them, I would "choose" being gay about as much as I would "choose" being physically disfigured. It's not a choice one would want to make.
On New Years Eve day, I've started making my list of resolutions. Drink more water. Read 15 books in 2012, for pleasure. Spend more time on my relationships, and volunteer once a month. But my hope for 2012, my hope for others' resolutions, is tolerance.
As someone who used to support the Catholic Church's teachings on homosexuality and same-sex marriage but no longer does, I have a few comments that might add to the discussion.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, as you might be aware, homosexuality used to be classified as a mental illness in the DSM, but was taken out during the 1970's. If you Google dsm homosexuality, you can find a number of pages from right-wing sources talking about how this was a terrible thing to do. This is actually how the idea of homosexuality being a choice came about, as well. If you have the starting point that homosexuality is bad, and it is not a mental illness, then I guess it must be a choice. That's essentially the logic they're using.
The other point I would make is the discrepancy between what certain anti-gay leaders say when they're trying to convert people, and what they say when they think they're only talking to hardcore supporters. I am probably one of the few people who ever supported the anti-marriage equality movement who actually grew up in a relatively liberal family.
What changed my mind on same-sex marriage, at least temporarily, was the argument that the purpose of government being involved in marriage was to provide a stable environment for raising biological children. Two people of the same sex can't have biological children, even in theory, so it doesn't make sense for them to have the rights and privileges of marriage. The other big point was that it is important for kids to have both a mother and a father. While there are single parents, whether because of death or one of the parents abandoning the family, the lack of a mother and father is not something that we should normalize even further by allowing same sex marriage and making it easier for LGBT parents to adopt children.
The problem is that they only use this kind of nuanced rhetoric when they're talking to people they're trying to convert, or people who support them but might be "going soft" and starting to question their beliefs. When they think they're only talking to people who are their hardcore supporters, it's a lot more about how disgusting and evil LGBT people are, and how they're trying to corrupt our children and ruin our society. Perhaps the most infuriating one of all is that the real reason that the sexual abuse atrocities of the Catholic Church occurred was that the church was getting to be too tolerant towards homosexuals. They really need to crack down on gay priests because it was their homosexual tendencies that caused them to abuse boys.
The point is not that most Catholics or even most conservative Catholics believe all these things. It's that the people who do believe them are actually gaining power in the church right now.
Back when I was a freshman in college, my parents all but encouraged me to leave the Catholic Church behind and get involved at the Lutheran Campus Center instead. The irony is that had I actually done that then, rather than taking my detour through right-wing Catholicism like I did, I'd probably still have a lot more respect for the Catholic Church than I actually do at this point.
This is not even the main reason that I decided to get out of the Catholic Church and get involved in the LCC, but it is definitely one of the reasons why I will never go back unless and until major changes occur at every level.
Some interesting points, Alex. I did know about the DSM diagnosis for homosexuality in the past. I guess it all comes down to the definition of marriage - whether you view that in terms of the Church, the government, the law...or your own view. If marriage is all about raising children, then we should not allow heterosexuals to be married unless they sign some sort of agreement that they will have children......right? It seems very odd to even suggest that. But a man and a woman still have that "right" to marry, without the desire to have kids.
ReplyDeleteJust a thought :) But anyway, thanks for reading and commenting!