(A brief exercise in logic and love)
It just won't stop happening. Stories and protests, letters to the editor, religious campaigns, political resolutions, legislative maneuverings, court battles, "Protect Marriage" protests, prayer vigils, news conferences.
The entire firestorm. And all because men want to marry the men they love, and women want to marry the women they love.
The logic? Just isn't there.
Listen to me.
Heterosexual love, marriage and procreation are not compromised or endangered by allowing homosexuals the benefits of love and marriage, or the rights to have children.
Let's be very clear about that. Any law passed to allow homosexual marriage would be prescriptive, not proscriptive. That is, it would be prescribing a right for a previously deprived population - same sex couples. It would *not* do so by proscribing someone else's rights. It would *not* proscribe heterosexual marriage.
Nor would allowing same-sex marriage work against heterosexual marriage rights on any other level.
It would not convince heterosexual fiances and fiancees to cancel their weddings, spark the dissolution of existing marriage, or tempt heterosexual couples not to have children. If it did, it would speak to the weak love or confused priorities of those heterosexual couples, not to same-sex marriage, or the near mystical destructive power apparently ascribed to it by its opponents.
Think about that for a moment. If a heterosexual man or woman believe that allowing someone else to legally express their love will hurt their marriage, or will turn a nation's heterosexuals into non-marrying singletons, their logic bone's broken.
And, when it comes to procreation, the other concept that same-sex marriage opponents say they want to protect, please consider this:
Given that our species continues to procreate so enthusiastically that we're threatening to knock our own planet out of orbit with sheer weight of numbers, I feel safe in predicting that same-sex marriage will not lead to the extinction of homo sapiens.
And finally, we come to the nut of the problem, the nut of my anger and despair at such a simplex world-view:
Some people appear to believe that merely by allowing such a law, one places one's society at risk from a creator who, for reasons known only to that creator, has arbitrarily decided that one kind of love is inferior to another, or actively evil.
When and why does a creator determine that?
Please do not point to your holy books, of whatever flavor (generally those of Levantine Monotheistic descent, but not, by any means, exclusively). A horrifically large number of rules and regulations in holy books are negatives - "thou shalt nots" - for whom the reasons amount to "because I said so."
That is not a reason, nor an answer. For anything.
Nor would a creator which provided for me this beautiful brain, this marvelous consciousness, wish me to let either atrophy by settling for "because I said so."
Math and logic, logic and love. They braid together so beautifully that God and the universe can't pull them apart. I don't imagine God wants to. But somehow, the word hasn't gotten to everyone. Or maybe it has, and people are simply trying to ignore it? You tell me.
I am willing to wait for your answer.