September 23, 2007

Some Random Thoughts on Maryland and Gay Marriage

I don't usually write often enough for Quench, but I figure I should post once this year.

Came across this article in WaPo.

It points out this wonderful gem from the Maryland court decision overturning a lower court which found the state's ban on gay marriage to be unconstitutional:

"The State has a legitimate interest in encouraging . . . a union that is uniquely capable of producing offspring within the marital unit."

Lots of interesting pointers. Like since when is a male/female couple "uniquely" capable of producing offspring? Last I checked, reproductive organs' functionality was not tied to sexual orientation. And since when was producing offspring a legitimate interest in today's world of overpopulation? And why must there be a "union" to have children? And why must it be within the "marital unit"?

Why does America spend so much time glorifying the "marital unit" as the answer to all our problems only to decide, in the end, that only a few people are allowed to benefit from it?

And why does this editorial writer end with a ridiculous statement like:

"While we see no reason that committed same-sex couples should not enjoy all the benefits of marriage, we worry that the refusal to discuss civil unions could be shortsighted. Now that the Maryland high court has spoken and the matter has returned to the political arena where it belongs, Gov. Martin O'Malley (D), who favors civil unions, should take up the cause. He would be ensuring nothing more and nothing less than that all Marylanders have the possibility of equal treatment under the law."

I mean, if they are interested in "nothing less than...equal treatment under the law", then why make such a huge push for civil unions which, as a whole, do not provide equal treatment? If you treat two people equally, saying one may have "marriage" and one may not doesn't seem too equal.

Blah blah blah, you've heard this all before. Gay marriage is almost old news these days. But I just bring these all up because it makes me wonder about society's contradictions. Why do we glorify marriage then say it's only for special people? Why do we say we're a free country but then wiretap everyone? Why do we say sex is bad, then struggle to understand asexuality? Why do we say that gender doesn't matter anymore, then say gender is everything when confronted with transgender issues? Why is society so hypocritical?

Maybe it's just that everything looks good on paper until it becomes "too real." I don't know..... Just makes me wonder sometimes.

1 comment:

icarus said...

these are really good questions, and they definitely express for me a lot of the contradictions in the rhetoric around sexuality, sex, identity, gender and civil rights in this country. you should send this in as a "letter to the editor"! :-)