Friday, August 12, 2005

In Support of Gay Marriage

Via Joe's Dartblog, I see that Alfonso Trujillo of HispanicPundit, one of my favorite bloggers, argues that gay marriage involves not just the same rights for homosexuals, but special rights:

Currently everybody already has the same rights with regard to marriage. You, homosexuals, heterosexuals, and me are all legally allowed to marry any person of the opposite sex of our choice who is distant from us in terms of kinship and who is not already married. Homosexuals have that very same right.

In other words, homosexuals as citizens of the United States have the same rights as I do. If a homosexual man wanted to marry a female who he is not related to, he could do so just as easily as I can. Homosexuals, as a group, are treated equally with regard to marriage as any other group.

“But gays are not allowed to marry the person they love”, you say. But that is the case with everybody. If I, as a male citizen of the United States fell in love with my sister, I would not be allowed to marry her. If I, as a male citizen of the United States fell in love with multiple women, I would be restricted to only marrying one. And just like gays, if I, as a citizen of the United States fell in love with another man, I too would be restricted in marrying him. In other words, gays, as citizens of the United States, have the same rights, and the same limitations, as everyone else.

Yes, that last statement is true. I do not believe this is a constitutional issue. But neither is it more than a semantic point that can be refuted simply by noting that homosexuals would not object to two heterosexual men marrying each other, either. They want these special rights for everyone.

And if you are a heterosexual man and think that prospect doesn't do much for your liberty as a citizen, then you now have some understanding of why this argument against gay marriage is so hollow. Because I don't believe this is a constitutional issue, it is up to the states to define marriage and the legal privileges and responsibilities associated with it. Every state legislature should expand its definition of marriage to allow it to include two members of the same sex.

What part of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is enhanced for anyone by restricting the opportunities of homosexuals to participate in marriage in the same ways as heterosexuals? I do not believe that society is made better off when it goes out of its way to marginalize any group of people.

Besides, where's the wisdom in having laws that allow Britney Spears to marry the person of her choice but not Andrew Sullivan? I think I would have a much harder time explaining her public behavior to my kids than I would his private behavior.

Other blogs commenting on this post

1 comment:

HispanicPundit said...

Thanks for the feedback Vox!!