Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Marriage is so Gay

It looks like proposition 8 finally got (rightfully) repealed: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/08/judge_vaughn_walker_hands_vict.html (Maybe this will draw some of the rage away from the Mosque story. =p)

Despite it being a very big topic currently, and one I have a lot to say about, I have thus far not posted about it on this blog mostly because everything I have to say has already been said. However, as this blog is as much to vent and collect my thoughts as to say things that are original and new, I guess I might as well go ahead with a few of them.

So, let's investigate some of the arguments brought to bear against gay marriage. The most common one I hear is a passage from Leviticus: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. (Leviticus 18:22) Well let's investigate this, shall we? When interpreting the Bible (or any text, really), it's important to keep in mind the cultural context in which it was written. Leviticus was, as the name implies, a code of laws written for the Levites, one of the 12 tribes of Israel. This is a culture where infant mortality was high, life expectancy was low and the entire culture was perpetually on the verge of extinction. They needed people constantly making babies, which mean men needed to be sleeping with (and impregnating) women, rather than each other, for the sake of the survival of the culture. In modern times, with overpopulation a huge problem in many areas, this is no longer as big an issue.

Of course, fanatic Biblical literalists will tell us that every word in the Bible is literally true no matter the context and that I just committed blasphemy. If that's true, I hope they never eat shellfish or wear two kinds of cloth together. It also alarming that they feel that handicapped people shouldn't be allowed in church (Leviticus 21:16-23) and that genocide and slavery are acceptable.

Then there are more secular arguments against gay marriage, though no less silly. For example: Gays shouldn't be married because the union will not produce children. Marriage stopped being about just children the moment it had legal benefits like hospital visitation or joint tax return filing attached to it. Also, what about infertile heterosexual couples? Are we going to tell them they can't marry? Or older couples past child bearing age? Or couples that can have children but choose not to? Then of course there's the option of adoption. With so many children in foster homes and orphanages in need of loving parents, it's arguably an even greater service to the species to take care of an adopted child than to make a new one, at least while so many are in need of care.

tl;dr Gay marriage is not going to plunge us into Armageddon.

No comments:

Post a Comment