Con Gay Marriage

John Fay, “Gay marr= iage? Let’s stop and think about this” The University of Washington Daily, November 25, 2008.

Few issues of cultural importance in America long escape the gaze= of a Simpsons’ episode.

In the episode titled “There’s Something About Marrying,&#= 8221; the city of Springfield legalizes gay marriage, prompting Homer Simpson to become an Episcopal priest in order to reap lucrative benefits for conduct= ing such unions.

Homer very quickly realizes that he could make even more money in nupt= ials if he is less discriminating, and by the end of the episode he’s proceeding to marry the Sea Captain to the mermaid-shaped masthead of his = ship.

We laugh about scenes like this and say they could never happen; of co= urse, that’s what our grandparents were saying about gay marriage a genera= tion ago.

Now, I realize the gay marriage issue surrounding the California voters’ decision on Proposition 8 is extremely emotional for a lot of people, and I respect th= eir difference of opinion, but let us try and consider the vote from a rational basis.

The decision of California’s Supreme Court in May to legalize gay marriage, which Prop. 8 overturned, was extremely rash. There is nothing constitutional abo= ut gay marriage on a state or federal level. For gay marriage to even fit wit= hin the court’s jurisdiction, it must have some basis in constitutionali= ty.

Yet the court argued that forbidding marriage rights to gays is discrimination, “like a person’s race or gender.” Race i= s a biological state; homosexuality is more of an emotional condition, and we should not, for that reason alone, start passing laws condoning it.

Being homosexual, like other emotional tendencies, doesn’t make someone a bad person, but it’s a problem that needs to be dealt with= , not denied.

Now, there are several major problems with legalizing gay marriage. On= ce you’ve legalized gay marriage, why not polygamy, incest, bestiality = or any other form of union? If the only criteria is that people love each other, then who says it’s wrong for a 70-year-old m= an to marry 10 underage girls?

Also, the Christian concept of marriage predates any state-sanctioned licensing program, which means marriage is an inherently religious concept= in America. Any state interpretation of marriage that violates traditional church views ma= y well be a violation of the First Amendment.

There’s also a social consideration. The potential of open homosexuality for creating social dysfunction has been made manifest in the protests against Prop 8 since Nov. 4.

Organizations such as the Mormon Church have been intimidated; people = who financially supported Prop. 8 have had their names posted on antigayblacklist.com — some have been harassed or even threaten= ed with losing their jobs.

This sad reaction illustrates the danger of gay marriage. Now, this is= not to suggest that all or even most supporters of gay marriage have acted inappropriately.

Once people become accustomed to violating certain social norms, they = tend to feel less constrained about breaking others.

It’s hard to tell someone they should respect basic social rules — such as not harassing people for honest disagreement — when = they already reject other customs, such as traditional marriage.

So, let’s think long and hard about this before overturning a tradition that has been in place for 2,000 years.

If traditional marriage is overturned, it won’t be the last trad= ition to be abolished by our government, and some of those will be ones none of = us want to lose.