Politics, Religion and Gay Marriage

This is a couple of weeks past due, but seeing as I can’t get it out of my head, I need to write about it now. I am an avid watcher of the pageants that are shown on television. I don’t think I have missed a single Miss America or Miss USA since I was a kid. Mom and I used to sit in front of the TV and pick our favorite girls that we thought should win the whole competition. Generally speaking we were always pretty accurate with who we thought should win. I always thought the Q&A portion of the competition was, well, a little bland.

Imagine my surprise this year when Perez Hilton is chosen to ask one of these questions. I basically knew what was coming before it even escaped his mouth. Who was the recipient of his (admittedly loaded) gay marriage question on whether or not is should be legalized in states past Iowa? None other than Miss California, the representative of the state that brought us Prop 8 last November. Immediately when she answered the question, my mind was stunned. First, she nonsensically mentioned something about “how great it is that we live in a country where we can choose same-sex or “opposite” marriage,” but that in her Country, and in her family Gay marriage is wrong, throwing in a “no offense” for good measure. I stand by my belief that she lost the crown not because of her opinion, but rather the way in which she answered the question.

I am saddened by her belief, a belief which is shared by many Americans. We come from a country with a sordid history. Most people weren’t recognized as citizens or granted the right to vote until a long time after our country was founded. Most religions, most races, woman and people with varying disabilities have been discriminated against because of how they were born. I feel that this is exactly what is being done to the Gay community.

Thomas Jefferson, one of our founding fathers, once wrote that “all, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.” In other words, the rights of the minority are to be protected from the will of the majority. At the time of laws passing, the following items were NOT supported by a majority of voting Americans: African-American Citizenship, right to own property and the right to vote, Native American Citizenship, right to own property and the right to vote, Women’s right to own property and the right to vote, interracial marriage (in certain states), the list goes on and includes certain religions being observed and personal rights that we have been granted. A vast majority of the foes of these eventual laws condoned their beliefs based on “biblical” thought and scripture.

This brings me back to Miss California, Carrie Prejean. On an interview the next day, she states that “it’s not about being politically correct; it’s about being biblically correct.” I have always known that there was a snippet in the bible regarding homosexuality, but not until now did I want to do some research. This passage can be found in the book of Leviticus, which also has many laws regarding what people should and should not eat, how they should bathe, that they need to be circumcised, various animal sacrifices, etc. I have not been able to find it anywhere else. While doing my research, I happened upon information dealing with “Old Testament” laws and “New Testament” laws, their validity and who needs to follow them. That is for another blog on another day, but a very interesting Google search if you ask me.

I am not attempting to disprove or disrespect the Bible. What I am saying is that the whole perceived message is one of love and acceptance for all of God’s children. I find it hard to believe that an entire group of people would be born to this planet, simply to be rejected and abused by the rest of us. If we are arguing from a religious standpoint, there are many churches out there that have embraced the Gay community and are willing to marry them. It is a violation of their first Amendment rights to not be granted the same religious opportunity as a heterosexual couple. I am not, however, arguing from a religious standpoint. I am arguing from a political standpoint of equal protection under the law. Without a government sanctioned marriage contract, gay couples have no (or limited) rights as far as property laws, inheritance laws, beneficiary laws, child-custody laws, tax laws, insurance laws, health care laws, etc. in places where they are not recognized. It is high time we stop obsessing ourselves with what is going on in our neighbor’s bedrooms and start caring a little more about what happens in our own.

In our country, marriage is not a privilege, it is a right. I have seen enough marriages, divorces, annulments, second marriages, affairs, fifth marriages, abuse, etc. that shows that anyone can get married, be married, stay married or not stay married. It is up to that individual whether or not they are doing it in the eyes of God and protecting the “sanctity” of the institution, or doing it for some inane protection that is only available to a married couple. Whatever the reason, heterosexual couples have the right, and homosexual couples don’t. It is not about the Bible, the argument is about political rhetoric. Since the beginning of our Country, Americans have feared and objected to that which they do not understand. It is within this knowledge that people can stand on a soap box and generate a following. If you do not believe in Gay Marriage, then do not marry someone of the same sex, no one is saying you have too. Fighting for what you believe in is one thing, fighting for the rights and privileges of those whom you do not agree with is something completely different all together, and that is the foundation our country was built on.

XOXO, Lauren