Make The World Safe From Hypocrisy
Last week I was told "you hurt the family unit" and that I am "morally wrong."
Pretty strong stuff, but considering that it was in reference to someone feeling threatened by the Massachusetts Superior Court deciding that there was no reason to prevent same-sex marriage under its Constitution, one might give the person who said it a break because they were upset by it, but I won't.
Because I am tired of being told that because I am gay and want the same legal rights and protections under the law as non-gay couples, that I am somehow endangering the family or a threat of some kind, or that I am morally wrong.
My partner and I have been in a decade long monogamous relationship. We are civic minded and participate in our community, we are watchful of our neighbors, we attend church and pay taxes, none of which I consider morally wrong.
We would most likely be described as the "nice couple" next door if not for the fact that we are both men.
Outside of the fact that the Bible clearly reads that one should not judge lest they be judged, these so called self-appointed paragons of virtue, do just that - but only when it comes to a class of people of which they are not a part.
What strikes me is that these same people who decry the so-called "homosexual agenda," (while clearly promoting their "heterosexual agenda,") and how it hurts the family, are mute when it comes to behavior that some might say "hurts the family" that is exhibited by heterosexuals.
Why are these self-righteous moralists not up in arms about the fact that statistics show that over half of all marriages today end in divorce within the first five years?
That would seem to hurt the family, wouldn't it?
What about heterosexuals who are unfaithful to their spouses? Why aren't those who espouse the virtuosity of heterosexuality not outraged and fighting to stop that?
Does anyone wonder why these crusaders for moral rightness, these alleged "Christian soldiers," are not publicly taking up arms against the massage parlors in Frederick County that exist where heterosexual men can get more than a massage if the price is right?
Can anyone explain to me how those establishments, and the men who frequent them, are helping the family and are morally good?
A look online shows that many websites are available to whet the appetites of all people, heterosexuals included, that get into more than just sex for procreation.
Some in particular, like the ones for men who obtain gratification from watching women stomping on small rodents or bugs, seem to be the sole proprietary property of the heterosexual community, yet nary a word is heard by those who deem themselves to be the keepers of morality fighting the "good fight" to stop this.
A simple perusal of America Online alone shows there are plenty of chat rooms filled with married heterosexual men and women cheating on their spouses.
Does this not "hurt the family?" Is none of this "morally wrong?"
Not to mention the very large number of chat rooms dedicated to "straight men for men."
Of course, the puritans in question would most likely blame that activity on the "perversity of homosexuality." But these men purport to be straight and married with children, so let's take them on their word.
And, wouldn't one say that sexually molesting children and pedophilia, which medical science has proven to be done overwhelmingly by heterosexuals, count toward "hurting the family?"
One would think, but you do not hear much of a crusade being taken up to protect the family from that, excepting, of course, the Catholic Church after years of denying it occurs within their walls.
Why don't the self-righteous moralists point the fickle finger of blame at themselves?
Are they saying that heterosexual misconduct is acceptable? They seem to be.
Are they saying it is morally appropriate to do things that many would think, "hurt the family" as long as it is a heterosexual doing it? Apparently so.
How horribly hypocritical, but that is what those who damn homosexuals as "hurting the family" but do not condemn actions by heterosexuals with the same zeal espouse.
But zealots are zealots for a reason - hate. And hating one's self is generally not an easy thing to do, especially if one thinks they are on some kind of mission from God - no matter how misguided they may be in their thinking.
It was, after all, Jesus Christ who said, "Let those who are without sin cast the first stone."
So, why is it these self-proclaimed purveyors of moral turpitude, based on their corruption of the teachings of Christ, love to throw stones at those they disdain, yet avoid stone throwing when they themselves might get hit?
One of the chief arguments against homosexual marriage is that it would defile the religiosity of the nature of matrimony.
I alone can count on both hands the number of "God-fearing Christians," who for whatever reason chose to divorce.
Some might say that divorce is against the church, yet, it is accepted today, as is getting married in an overly expensive white meringue dress, (which few of today's modern brides can really wear with a clear conscience), in a ceremony that in many instances nearly bankrupts one's family. But hey, it makes God happy for a while, right? Until one gets too tired to make it work and walks away.
But that doesn't "hurt that family" or de-sanctify the religious nature of the institution of marriage at all, does it?
Fear and prejudice is what drives those who oppose homosexual marriage.
Fear, because it shows that, unlike how these "morally right" people want to vilify us, we gay folk share so, so many of the same values and just want the same things they do.
Prejudice, because acceptance of things different is difficult and when one is used to hating someone or a type of person, it may take a lifetime, a generation or longer for the hatred toward "those people" to go away.
Ask many a black man or woman.
Thomas Jefferson wrote that "all men are created equal," a premise toward which this nation is supposed to strive. The arguments against equality for gays and lesbians only prove that many are not striving to make that statement a reality in any way.
Some are even going so far as to contradict that premise by proffering a Constitutional amendment that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman.
What about the notion of "liberty and justice for all?"
We ought to be ashamed that we as a nation may even consider allowing the idea of amending the Constitution to legalize discrimination to be legitimately debated.
Have we learned nothing from our own history?
In turn, can we not question where the slippery slope will lead if we deny gays and lesbians from marrying by amending the Constitution?
Maybe we will be put in internment camps to protect these "morally right" heterosexuals from having to look at their own prejudices and not face the fact that this nation's ideals are about equality not inequality, based on law, not on an interpretation of religion that would attempt to impose a theocracy upon us that stands in contradiction to the constitutional reality that is our country's foundation.
As to whether or not we gays are less moral than our heterosexual brothers and sisters, just a word of advice - God is watching all of us.