Exploring the fundamental flaws of fundamentalist thought
If you’re straight, then why do you care?
“If you’re straight, then why do you care so much about gay marriage rights?”
This is a question I am asked far too often. Honestly, I find it somewhat unsettling that so many people find this concept so difficult to grasp.
The answer is quite simple. I care about gay marriage rights because I care about human rights. In our modern society, no one should have to struggle for the right to be treated with kindness, fairness, and respect. No one should have to suffer the indignity of having their rights denied or stripped away because of people’s stubborn adherence to ridiculously outdated dogma. The fact that this happens to anyone infuriates me.
Same-sex marriage isn’t a “gay issue”, because there’s simply no such thing as a gay or straight issue. When the most basic rights are denied to any group of people, we all bear the burden as a society. Whether or not you condone homosexuality is not the issue, as I don’t think anyone is asking for your approval. They are simply asking that you grant them the same basic rights that you take for granted.
Of course, many people who ask this question do so as a form of attack. They attempt to silence straight advocates of gay rights by calling their sexuality into question. Sadly, this tactic works far too often. Personally, I don’t care. If you want to “accuse” me of being gay, then be my guest. You’re free to think whatever you want. Despite what you may think, it’s not offensive to me in any way.
So I just want to implore all of you in-the-closet straight supporters of gay rights out there… Don’t be silenced by a bunch of ignorant fools. Don’t tell yourself that it doesn’t affect you so it’s not your problem. Take a stand for your family, friends, and coworkers who are forced to fight for their most basic rights. Only by standing up for one another can we hope to ever achieve a better future.
I should add one more point… I know I said that I don’t care if people think I’m gay. There is, however, one exception. If you happen to be a thoughtful, intelligent woman who is into opinionated atheist bloggers in their mid thirties… I AM STRAIGHT!!!!!
| Print article | This entry was posted by Brian on December 3, 2009 at 6:17 pm, and is filed under Brian's Philosophical Ramblings, Fundamentalism, Human Rights, Politics. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 9 months ago
Well said, Brian!
about 8 months ago
Hey Brian,
I’m a new member of the FTSGP. I like what you have to say here and throughout. Thought I’d share this article from the NYtimes:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/20/magazine/20george-t.html?pagewanted=5&em
The use of “reason” (from the perspective of a Catholic lawyer) to declare homosexuals immoral (amongst other things).
I’m sure you’re familiar with Robert George and may have seen this article. On the off change that you have not, I just wanted to share. I hope it doesn’t give you a headache like it has given me.
about 7 months ago
Brian,
So I assume you also champion the right to marriage for those in polygamous relationships, underage relationships, and consensual familial relationships? Because, afterall, they are discriminated against as well. If you don’t, why not? That would seem rather inconsistent if you don’t, since you argue all are entitled to basic human rights.
about 7 months ago
There are clear and distinct difference between same sex marriage and the other examples you cited, and therefor no inconsistency.
Underage relationships? Absolutely not. People who are not of legal age of consent cannot enter freely into a legally binding contract.
Polygamous relationships are a more complicated issue from a legal standpoint. They would require an entirely new set of laws concerning taxes, communal property, and power of attorney.
Legalizing same sex marriage doesn’t raise any complicated legal issues. It would still be the exact same legally binding contract between two adults with the same rights, responsibilities, and privileges as straight marriage.
about 7 months ago
Your response confirms what I suspected: that you’re really not in favor of basic human rights for everybody like you say. And no rational person should be. Just like you, the government has a right to draw a line as far as marriages go. Whether they should or not is a different question.
1) There absolutely is inconsistency. Yes, there are differences, but still inconsistencies.
2) Right… but who draws the line on underage relationships? The government does. Why should we discriminate against those who are supposedly underage. Why 18? Why shouldn’t 16 be underage? Is it inconceiveable that a 17 year-old is more mature and ready for marriage than an 18 year old? Why should they have to wait? Why discriminate against them? Why not champion their rights as well?
3) This is laughable. Now you’re rationalizing “discrimination” on the basis of “well, it would be hard to change some laws.” So? If it’s truly discrimination, and you champion basic human rights to marriage for all, then shouldn’t you be fighting as well to find a way to legalize it? So what you’re saying is that you champion basic civil rights to marriage for all unless it seems to be too complicated. Then discrimination is OK.
The point is it is disingenous for those who say everyone should have a right to marriage, goverment shouldn’t intrude, yada, yada, yada, and then they themselves support drawing lines (i.e. “discriminating” against some) when it comes to marriage.
All of this is not to say homosexual marriage should not be legalized; it’s just to point out the hypocrisy in so many who champion its legalization.