Distinction without Indifference: Gay Marriage

Posted September 28, 2010

Distinction without Indifference: Gay Marriage

Census released a disturbing report today about the drop in marriage rates. While the reporter covering this story linked the trend to the recession, I have to wonder about the timing of the article. Could it really be a coincidence that this story was released amidst a fire storm of hot button issues such as “don’t ask, don’t tell”?

As we move closer to the elites plan of a New World Order it is appalling to see the progress they have made in the destruction of the family unit. While I personally believe marriage can be just as meaningful between Adam and Steve as it is between Adam and Eve much of the country doesn’t agree.

The bottom line is if the government itself stayed out of our bedrooms the issue of Gay Marriage would be a thing of the past for us all. The tedious and seemingly unending arguments seem to be powered by the word more then the institution itself. Have you ever looked to see the difference in definition of the word marriage amongst the government vs. the church? This creates the problem and it is a very easy fix.

If the government would just stop using the word marriage all together much of the arguments over this issue would disappear over night. After all most people do not have any issue with two people of the same sex being together if they don’t call it marriage. Isn’t marriage an issue for the church anyway? When did the government get to decide what the church will and will not recognize?

So there it is. An easy fix. Abolish the word marriage on all government documents and choose a term that will apply to any and all love unions for which the government wants to give perks to or the insurance companies want to distribute discounts and coverage to. Seems simple doesn’t it? Of course then what would we all argue about?

3 comments

Posted in Opinion

Tagged as distinction, indifference, gay, marriage, and rights

Comments

Michiko Ota November 1, 2010

What we need to do is very simple, we need to eliminate "state's rights" where it comes to issues related to vital records which includes marriage.

Myself, as a pre-op transgender woman.. I want to get MARRIED. Not a "civil union" or a "contract", but married. I also want my marriage to be recognized properly by foreign governments in the event that I marry a foreign national and desire to life in their country.

I also feel that state's rights should be taken away where it comes to birth certificates. Birth records should be done more at a national level. Right now, even after surgery, two states will not change the gender marker on birth certificates for the sake of morality. A recent recommendation by the World Psychiatric Association of Transgender Health (WPATH) has told administrations that gender reassignment surgery should no longer be required if a transgender person wants to change their "gender marker" on documents. In 2009, the Republic of Ireland passed the Passports Bill, which permits a transgender person who has transitioned through means other than surgery (e.g. hormone treatment) to obtain a passport in their identified gender (this actually predated the WPATH recommendation). I recently spoke with the Irish Consul General in San Francisco who helped write this legislation when he was in Dublin. Earlier this year under the leadership of Hillary Clinton, the US State Department now allows gender marker changes pre-op similar to the way Ireland is handling it. The US change was a direct result of the WPATH recommendation. Unfortunately, Social Security, ICE and the IRS has not followed suit and still requires surgery but hopefully they will follow soon. The change in passport policy was done despite the unwillingness by the states to recognize identified gender on moral grounds. (In all fairness though, some states will permit the changing of state ID [driver's license/non-operator's IDs] with certification from a physician that the person is medically transitioning or has transitioned to the other gender through non-surgical methods).

I am thinking that we need to look at the state's role (e.g. state's rights) in the blockading of marriage equality and for the two dozen or so states that have written definition of marriage into their constitutions would be subject to a challenge or would be overridden by federal pre-emption.

First things first.. we must repeal the "Defense of Marriage Act" at the federal level.

Good blog.. we'll talk soon. <3