New York judge orders that marriage licenses for gay couples be issued starting in March, unless a higher authority (read: court, not God) intervenes. (New York Times)
Not that I plan on ever marrying another man, but as far as my own sense of ethics goes, I'm glad I'm in New York rather than, oh, anywhere in the south.
State Justice Doris Ling-Cohan has ruled that denying homosexuals the right to engage in civil matrimony (based on the Domestic Relations law) is unconstitutional. Under the antiquated law, gay couples are denied the common rights of loving and committed individuals, and prevented from common freedoms and protections normally restricted to straight couples. Let's see what the judge has to say:
"Simply put, marriage is viewed by society as the utmost expression of a couple's commitment and love," Justice Ling-Cohan wrote. "Plaintiffs may now seek this ultimate expression through a civil marriage."
[...]
"An instructive lesson can be learned from the history of the anti-miscegenation laws and the court decisions which struck them down as unconstitutional," Justice Ling-Cohan wrote. "The challenges to laws banning whites and nonwhites from marriage demonstrate that the fundamental right to marry the person of one's choice may not be denied based on longstanding and deeply held traditional beliefs about appropriate marital partners."Does anyone remember the giant tidal wave of rampant interracial marriages that happened after that earlier law was struck down? And how it completely destroyed and decimated the nation, killed off religion and the economy, simply by mixing races and thinning the barrier between tradition and equality? And how the cost of converting 'colored' water fountains to 'interracially married' water fountains devastated everything below Maryland? Anyone?
Admittedly, it's going to be a tough battle for homosexual marriage to become 'acceptable' for the legions of people in America whose best understanding of the issue is that "Homos are queer, yo!" or "God told me that homosexuals are evil." (Or even, "Gays and the ACLU were responsible for 9/11.") There are many arguments against it, a good number of which could substitute 'gay' with 'colored' and warp us back to the earlier part of the last century. Aside from that, the arguments mostly break down into a religious mumble about something one of those books said thousands of years ago (right next to the passage about stoning your wives) and I get really, really angry when someone else's religion starts dictating my lawful rights. My expression of love and commitment to my partner, be it man or woman, is my right, and I do not intend to let someone's bias, bigotry, and superstition interfere.
I dream of a day when it's completely acceptable for non-white people to marry white people, men to marry men, women to marry women, and for everyone to look totally fabulous.
[From Tales to Astonish!]
Post a Comment