pbrim: (Default)
[personal profile] pbrim
Copy this sentence into your livejournal if you're in a heterosexual marriage/relationship (or if you think you might be someday), and you don't want it "protected" by the bigots who think that gay marriage hurts it somehow.

OK, so my marriage is a failure. My goal is to have the divorce final before my 25th anniversary next May. The problem is simple: My husband is an asshole, and I was at first so foolish to think that, while he was an asshole to others, he would treat me differently because I love him and he says he loves me, then later so foolish as to think that things would get better when x happend or y quit happening. Finally I was so stubborn that I was unwilling to give up on promises made, until I realized that sticking with this mistake was killing both of us. Our relationship was not strengthend by other hetero marrigages around us, or weakened by gay marriages. It's failure was strictly due to our own flaws and I resent anyone else pretending to know what is going on between my husband and myself. By law and by religion, marriage is a sacred bond between two people whose privacy is not to be breached. Spouses can't testify against each other pecisely because society feels there is a value in protecting the privacy of that bond. If you want to protect the sanctity of marriage, then respect the sacredness of that private bond by keeping your nose out of it. Let people marry whoever they love and mind your own business!

The anti-marriage people also say that they are trying to protect children. I say that protection of children is one important reason for marriage equality. One thing that struck me about all those pictures from the Valentine's day weddings in SF that started all this was how many had their children with them. Children of a marriage have certain rights, such as the right to be supported by both parents, even if they end up splitting up. If one parent dies, they are entitled to inherit from that parent, and they can't easily be taken from the continuity of living with the surviving parent. But we are building a two tiered system in this country where certain children, and certain families are deemed to be worthy of support and protection from society, and other children and families are deemed to be lacking, to be unworthy of support. It is time that we recognize that every child is precious, every child is deserving of every protection society has to offer, regardless of who their parents are. The best way to do that is to recognize all families legally, and to extend to all children the time tested protections and support now only available to some.

((hugs))

Date: 2008-11-09 08:31 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the-resa.livejournal.com
And bravo, for a very well written post.

Date: 2008-11-09 01:15 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sparkindarkness.livejournal.com
Agreed on every line

Date: 2008-11-09 10:24 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tomtac.livejournal.com
Great minds think alike. I have come to the same conclusions.

The government has no business saying what is a marriage and what isn't. Not if it is a religious issue, and every argument I have heard so far is that is the case.

What the government -should- be doing is trying to make sure that children get a solid commitment of a solid family from their parents.

The system now is not foolproof and not always great, but if gays are going to raise kids, I rather think we need to have gay marriage.

(Btw, this means that, if you really aren't going to have children, then I don't give a rat's patootie what two adults want to do together, as long as they don't hurt anyone else.)
(deleted comment)

Date: 2008-11-23 02:11 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pbrim.livejournal.com
Welcome to it, and thanks.

Profile

pbrim: (Default)
pbrim

February 2015

S M T W T F S
1234 567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 21st, 2017 11:09 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios