Gay Marriage.
Another way to describe this is "Two people who love each other promising to devote themselves to each other for the rest of their lives" (or until divorce).
As you can probably guess i'm for Gay marriage. Even that's too restrictive though. I'm really just for two people who love each other wanting to express it in this way.
Now, everyone's heard the arguments. Marriage is man and woman. Marriage is blah blah bible. And my favoriate... you shouldn't sully the sanctity of marriage by allowing same sex couples bond in this way (yet it's ok for America to vote on who gets married on reality TV?????).
So in California, we have a very specific situation. The courts decided, much to the approval of many people, that same sex marriages should be legalized. Fantastic right? 6 months later we have a vote that goes through that shows that the majority of people who live in the state of California dont want same sex marriage to be legalized.
So last week i'm watching some TV show, honestly can't remember which one it was, but there was an advocate for same sex marriage speaking about that very situation. In it she mentions the typical arguments. We've all heard them. And then the one that really irritated me was this: (obviosuly this isn't going to be an exact quote, but the point is the same).
"...very upset about this decision. California shouldn't be bullied and pushed into 'Mob Rule' just because the majority of people want something"
shocking...
So i'm going to take this on a bit of a related tangent before continuing. Ethics and morality are not defined. They are not specific. Infact, with a good enough argument, you may even be able to say they aren't even real. The morality of a populace is determined, in large part, by the thoughts of the majority living in a specified area. Lets list some examples:
In China, people eat dogs... it's like their chicken (except, chicken is actually their chicken). People in North America probably find this immoral.
In tribes that practice cannibalism, to them, it's not immoral to do so. It's accepted in their populace.
Are these examples too harsh?
What about child sex laws? A few hundred years ago it was totally acceptable to be a 14yr old mother (or younger). In certain countries it's immoral, based on reasons such as religion, to expose your face in public. Kissing someone on the lips in public is considered immoral in some countries. Striking your wife is considered morally acceptable in places.
It comes down to the fact that no single thing is actually moral or immoral as these are concepts that are constantly changing, based on flawed human perception, based on culture, upbringing, religion, etc.
Back to gay marriage. The politicians have a job. When a given politician is given power, it's because the majority of people like his beliefs, and want him to be the person to make the tough decisions, for your community, town, city, or country. If the majority of people say "make something illegal", a politicians job is to do that. They held a vote, the majority of people were against it, so that's where it went. How would you feel if the majority of people here in canada wanted drunk driving to be illegal, but the government went "you know what... too bad!". And yes I know this is a ridiculous example but it's set to make a point.
Should Gay marriage be legal? Of course. Marriage doesn't do anything other than provide a ceremony for two people to express their love for one another. No one gets hurts, no one benefits more than they should otherwise (gay couple can still be considered common-law) and two loving people walk away with the same wedding day memories that everyone should be allowed to share.
But if the majority of people in an area say no... i'm sorry, but that's how democratic areas work. It's upsetting to see so many people against something so pure, and I hope that it does some day change and that people stop merely "accepting it" and start realizing that that's just the way things should be.
Love is Love. You dont choose it, you dont force it, it just happens.
But the sad truth is... Majority Rules.
This Post dedicated to Jo, who waited for it with "bated breath".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I don't disagree with most of it, except for when you talk about majority rules. Majority isn't supposed to rule -- the whole idea of the Charter of Rights (and the U.S. Bill of Rights) is to protect the rights of minorities. So, for example, the white majority doesn't get to prevent the black minority from voting.
ReplyDeleteThe courts are supposed to keep the government (or the majority of voters) from trampling on the rights of vulnerable groups. So if you think gays and lesbians are a minority whose rights are worth protecting, then it's up to the courts (or, in a perfect world, the government) to ensure that happens.
-james
Ok, now your argument about Majority isn't supposed to rule is... sort of correct? The system is created specifically to make majority rule... Hence the reason when you vote for someone, it's the person with the most votes that wins (unless you're George Bush JR.)
ReplyDeleteThere is a line to be drawn at to what minority rights are to be protected, but that line is drawn with a dry-erase marker at the bottom on a swimming pool. If you're talking about wanting to protect minority rights, which minority rights get protected? And who gets to decide which minorities get protected? Is it up to the government to force it's own self-thought declarations of what is good or moral and deserves protection? The People?
The problem is the charter of rights is limited in what's it's capable in doing. Saying it's meant to protect the minorities means nothing when all possible minorities haven't been decided. There are minority groups that get protected and shouldn't, and then there are groups that don't get protected but should.
So if you leave it up to the people... then it;s considered a majority rule. If you leave the decision in the hands of the government, then you get majority rule as well, because the government is upholding the will of the people, voted in by the majority. (unless there's a minority govt, then things get even more complex).
The problem is, there's no fix. If you think something isn't fair, there's 3 things you can do. Live with it as it is. Fight it (if fighting it doesn't get you killed). Or go somewhere else that your ideals are to be accepted.
One good example of this is Polygamy. Why is this illegal? I honestly have no idea. If some guy wants to marry more than one woman why not let him? Does it hurt anyone? Nope. Is it weird? Yup :P This is a situation where a minority belief has been made illegal because the majority of people disagree with it, even though it doesn't harm anyone.
Thoughts?