Kat (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
pennie_dreadful) wrote2008-11-06 02:06 pm
pennie_dreadful) wrote2008-11-06 02:06 pm
Entry tags:
must talk about this
Apparently a ban on gay marriage was passed in California 2 days ago. The reason being that the ban's supporters managed to turn the campaign from being about basic civil rights to some lunatic mush about children being indoctrinated to accept gay marriage against their parents' wishes. Meanwhile a portion of the population is being denied their civil rights.
If they really want to create more bigots they can always homeschool their kids. Hell, they aren't up in arms anymore about evolution being taught in schools; while they're at it why don't they try and pass a ban on that, too? Aren't science teachers "indoctrinating" their children to believe in evolution instead of creation?
As far as marriage goes, while it's not something I want for myself, I don't see why it should bug anybody if someone else wants to, be they an opposite sex or same sex couple.
One thing that struck a chord in me, and made me pissed off and feel the need to rant about it, is what a woman said; "The people of California stood up for traditional marriage and reclaimed this great institution."
Great institution?
As far as I can figure, marriage was invented for one reason: to control women. It was not about falling in love and wanting to be with someone forever. Back in the day a husband was well within his rights to murder his wife for the slightest percieved insult. Even as recently as 150 years ago, a woman was essentially the property of her husband; all her assets and property became his as soon as she said I Do. So while I do not pass judgement on married friends or people who want to be married, and I know that marriage's meaning has evolved through the millenia, I really do not see how it is a "great institution".
If they really want to create more bigots they can always homeschool their kids. Hell, they aren't up in arms anymore about evolution being taught in schools; while they're at it why don't they try and pass a ban on that, too? Aren't science teachers "indoctrinating" their children to believe in evolution instead of creation?
As far as marriage goes, while it's not something I want for myself, I don't see why it should bug anybody if someone else wants to, be they an opposite sex or same sex couple.
One thing that struck a chord in me, and made me pissed off and feel the need to rant about it, is what a woman said; "The people of California stood up for traditional marriage and reclaimed this great institution."
Great institution?
As far as I can figure, marriage was invented for one reason: to control women. It was not about falling in love and wanting to be with someone forever. Back in the day a husband was well within his rights to murder his wife for the slightest percieved insult. Even as recently as 150 years ago, a woman was essentially the property of her husband; all her assets and property became his as soon as she said I Do. So while I do not pass judgement on married friends or people who want to be married, and I know that marriage's meaning has evolved through the millenia, I really do not see how it is a "great institution".
no subject
But in defence of marriage - if two people want to stand up in front of their friends and family and say 'yes, I commit to just being with you' I do think it is a great institution. But one that should be open to anyone who feels that that is what they want to do.
The idea that allowing same sex couples to marry would somehow 'devalue' hetero marriage is just stupid - in fact, it is placing enormous value on the concept.
Yet another case of narrow-minded people dictating their world view on the rest of the population - when it is really NONE of their business.
Okay, I'll get off my soap-box now. At least I am not the only one who likes to rant!
no subject
It just boggles my mind that the same people who voted for Obama--who supports abortion, by the way--voted against same sex marriage because of their religious values. So what they were saying is it's okay to vote for a president who thinks it's okay to kill babies, but two chicks or two dudes can't stand before a justice of the peace and say I Do? What kind of logic is that?!