In defence of Nightdragon�s stance on gay marriage

09 January 2004 ~ 00:45

I have to say, I cannot see what he has really said to offend, and I think he and I have a similar stance on this issue.

I totally agree that same sex couples should have the exact legal rights that heterosexual couples currently enjoy. Namely, to inherit each other�s property, act as next of kin in any medical and legal decisions, adopt children, enjoy �spouse� perks such as family private health insurance, staff discounts, etc., and to be treated the same as spouses in regard to immigration policy.

The only issue that I, like nightdragon, have is in using the word �marriage� to describe it. A �marriage� is the partnership of a man and a woman. Look it up in the dictionary if you doubt me. That doesn�t mean gays and unmarried heterosexual couples shouldn�t be able to form legal civil unions.

The fact is, there are a lot of men and women who do not want to get married. They too, just like gay couples, would like a change in the law to allow them to inherit each other�s property, for example. The law�in the UK anyway�has already made a step in this direction as far as immigration is concerned. The unmarried partner of a British citizen can get a visa to live in the UK, just as a spouse can, be they a gay or a straight couple. The US does not allow the same-sex partner of a US citizen to come to live in the United States.

However, if we allow same sex civil unions to be called marriage, what exactly are we going to call heterosexual civil unions? That will, by definition, be �marriage� too. But these people do not want to get married and that is why they want legal civil partnerships to be allowed!

Let�s look at it another way: If two gay men adopt a baby (and I agree, why shouldn�t they?), will the child call one parent �daddy� and the other �mummy?� No, of course not, because a �mummy� is, by definition, female. Again, look it up in the dictionary if you don�t agree. Of course the child will call both men daddy. Maybe �daddy John� and �daddy Peter� or whatever, like some people do with grandparents; whatever works for them. But one is certainly not a mother, however politically incorrect it might be to say that.

So, the argument really all boils down to just one word. Personally, if I had the same rights as everyone else, I wouldn�t give two figs what those rights were called. Just end discrimination, and call it what you like.

And to answer another question for both nightdragon and myself, why would I want a black friend if I were a racist? And even if I did, if I were a black person I would not want a racist white person as a friend. So yes, I think if you have black friends you are highly unlikely to be a racist.

I am so totally not homophobic. I spent my youth in gay clubs with my best friend of twenty years and probably know more about life as a homosexual than most straight people do. I respect them 100 percent, and I would resent being labelled a bigot by someone who sounds like he�s got the biggest chip on his shoulder in the world. Life may have dealt him some tough cards, but I have not, so please do not take it out on me!


Stored nuts | Future acorns