This is to be presented as a speech, so feedback would be welcome! Thanks! :)
Presentation of an Issue: Gay Marriage
My contention is that gay marriage should be legally recognised. There are numerous aspects to this topic, so I will try to cover as many points as possible.
The first point is that gay couples have been cohabitating and living as married couples since time immemorial. Homosexuality is not a new thing – it’s just talked about more these days. Gays will continue to live as married couples whether legally recognised or not. Society will not stop homosexuality by refusing to recognise their unions. To refuse to do so based on the genitalia they possess is petty in the extreme and achieves nothing positive.
Another aspect of the government’s failure to recognise gay couples is when it comes to things such as Centrelink benefits. Straight couples, whether they have walked down the aisle or not, are for all intents and purposes, deemed to be married – and are treated as such. As a result, they frequently receive less in the way of government assistance. Yet gays in the same circumstances receive more, as their relationships aren’t recognised. Yet the anti-gay marriage folks would be the first to complain that this isn’t fair! Pot… Kettle… Black?
In my experience, the people that object most strongly to gay marriage, are also those that object to homosexuality in general. They are also usually the ones who claim that homosexuality is “wrong”, “unnatural”, and “against God”. So, let’s delve into the minefield that is religion!
Firstly, this stance incorrectly assumes that marriage is strictly a religious matter. It is not. Atheists marry all the time, and fewer and fewer marriages are taking place in places of worship. Marriage is a legal contract, and just happens to be a religious rite in some faiths. This is why the law can deem a couple to be divorced, but some faiths will not recognise it.
Secondly, the religious who object to gay marriage also say, “Marriage is for children, and gays can’t have children!” By this logic, infertile and older couples should also be denied the right to marry. At the same time, there are plenty of gay couples who are parents, and thus should be afforded the right to marry. It’s for the children, isn’t it?
Thirdly, the claim that homosexuality is “unnatural”. Something unnatural is that which is not found in nature, and whether these folks like it or not, homosexuality is, in fact, found across as many as 500 species, including gay animal couples who have successfully raised orphaned young of their own species. The figures on homosexual and bisexual animals, as shown by research, are staggering. Among the Australian black swans, gay couples represent one quarter of all the population – and among the American bison, homosexual sex is more common than hetereosexual! It didn’t take terribly much reading for me to conclude that humans are by far the least kinky creatures on this planet. I have an article to that effect, which I won’t read aloud lest the faint of heart should struggle. :)
But the topic of homosexuality among animals wouldn’t be complete without the story of Roy and Silo. Roy and Silo are two chinstrap penguins, who live at the Central Park Zoo in Manhattan. They so desperately wanted their own chicks that they even adopted a rock, which they treated as an egg in every respect. Their chief keeper finally gave them a fertile egg that was in need of care. Roy and Silo are the perfect parents. They now have a daughter, Tango, who they raised to maturity.
At a different zoo in Germany, four female penguins had to be introduced to the flock, when zookeepers realised that six of their penguins were, in fact, all males, living paired off in homosexual unions. The introduction of the girls had no impact – the male penguins weren’t interested and remained in their original relationships – and as it happens, the girls weren’t that into them, either. Additional males have since been flown in so that the girls can find mates! Clearly, homosexuality and bisexuality isn’t just natural – it’s astoundingly common.
Now, the matter of “sin”. “Sin” refers to an offence against a deity – that is, the breaking of a religious law. So essentially, those that say homosexuality is a sin, are also begging the question that not only does a god exist, but it’s the god they believe in, who dictates the laws according to their religious beliefs. It is only some religions that have this taboo, not all. Some deities (and thus, their religions) that condone homosexuality and bisexuality, or even have homosexual or bisexual deities, include:
• Zeus, the Greek King of the Gods, had affairs with both women and men, such as Ganymede.
• Astarte, the Great Mother. Her temple staff included a caste of gay male priests called the kelabim.
• Pan, the patron god of shepherds and god of nature, is famous for his sexual prowess with both maidens and shepherds. Pan is also reported to have had relationships with younger, teenage boys.
• Inanna had a creature neither male nor female rescue her from the underworld, named Asushunamir. This is sometimes regarded as the origin of the queer ones.
• Apollo has often been seen as bisexual, as he has been associated with the hyacinth (the traditional flower symbolic of homosexuality). He may have also been sexually involved with a man bearing that same name (Hyacinthus) in Greek myth.
Buddhism and various forms of Paganism are quite accepting of homo- and bisexual people as well, with Buddhism’s main caution being against sexual behaviour that could harm others – regardless of gender.
Since we live in a predominantly Christian culture, let’s take a look at what Christian scripture actually says about homosexuality. Now, I deliberated over whether to include any scriptural reference at all, and decided that I should at least touch on one simply because many of those who object to gay marriage, justify their objections with scripture. I found four references – two from Jewish scripture (what Christians refer to as the “Old Testament”), and two from Christian scripture (the Christian “New Testament”). To delve in and explain each one would take me well over the ten-minute mark, so what I have done instead, is print the article I found on the topic, and make it available for anyone who wants to read it.
That said, the most common scriptural objection is the one that refers to Sodom and Gomorrah. Since this one is brief, I will talk about it, and leave the others for those who care to read.
So, Sodom and Gomorrah: A lot of religious folks like to warn of how God wiped out Sodom due to homosexuality. But what does the scripture actually say?
The story can be found in Genesis, chapters 18 and 19. In chapter 18, we’re told that Sodom is a town full of wickedness, but we’re not told exactly what it is that makes them so wicked. In chapter 19, we’re told of two angels visiting Lot and his family. That evening, “all the men of Sodom” rock up at Lot’s doorstep and demand that Lot’s visitors be sent out so that the men could “know them”. Lot pleads with them not to do this – and Lot offers the entire population of men in the town, his TWO VIRGIN DAUGHTERS INSTEAD! And here are Christians saying that homosexuality is wrong! But that’s a side issue. The men continue to make their demands, and threaten Lot with the same fate as his guests should he not comply, at which point, angelic intervention sees the offending men blinded.
Now, nowhere in this tale is homosexuality explicitly condemned. Rather, sexual immorality is condemned, as is gang rape. That is much more believable a condemnation. In fact, Ezekiel 16:48 says that, “This was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.” Later on in Christian scripture, Jude sees the sin as seeking to interbreed with angels, which is something God was seen to be rather unimpressed with elsewhere – in Genesis chapter 6, verses 1 to 8.
There is a peculiar belief among some folks that sexual preference is chosen. On the surface it seems odd, but there is a reason for it: if sexual preference isn’t chosen, it can’t be deemed a sin. Therefore, since it is a sin, it must also be a choice. This is circular logic at its finest. It’s a sin because it’s chosen, and it’s chosen because it’s sin. This rationale raises a very interesting point. The standard belief among most Christians is that God is perfect. The dictionary defines perfect as:
1. Lacking nothing essential to the whole; complete of its nature or kind.
2. Being without defect or blemish: a perfect specimen.
3. Pure; undiluted.
So now I ask you: Does God make mistakes? How is it possible for an all-knowing, all-powerful god to make an error? After all, if he is errant, he is not perfect.
If the contention remains that God is perfect and does not err, and he is the creator of all there is, then homosexuals are behaving EXACTLY as God intended.
From this point, the usual response is along the lines of God being perfect, but humans being fallible and sinful, etc. I am not saying that humans don’t make mistakes or do bad things, but sexuality cannot be chosen. It is hardwired into us. You are what you are. And if God did indeed create us, and does not make mistakes, then he created homosexuals on purpose.
This, of course, is not a popular view among Christians in general, and to that end, various denominations have established “treatment” facilities, to straighten gays out, as it were. Time and again it has failed, with some people never changing, and others returning to their true nature later on.
Sexuality isn’t chosen. When I encounter homophobes, I like to ask them, “How old were you when you decided to be straight?” They usually stare blankly and reply, “Huh? I didn’t.” Precisely. I didn’t reach puberty and deliberate over which sex I felt attracted to. It just came naturally. I just happened to be straight – and gays just happen to be gay. The reason so many of them agonise over their sexuality in their teen years is because of the social implications being gay has – but it’s not something they choose. If there’s anyone unconvinced, I invite them to volunteer to be “treated” to turn gay. Heck, I’ll volunteer. Turn ME gay! I didn’t think so.
If being gay is a choice, I ask you to consider one more thing: Why would anyone CHOOSE to be a pariah, be discriminated against, shunned, disowned, beaten or even murdered? Doesn’t sound like a life anyone would choose if there were a better option.
Roy and Silo the penguins aren’t the only gay parents to have successfully raised children. I personally have friends who were raised by homosexual parents, and who themselves grew up to be straight. Between that and the fact that straight parents raise children who grow up to be gay, it should be clear that sexuality isn’t chosen, but is hardwired in our very beings.
Ask yourself this: Would you deny people the right to marry just because they had green eyes? It’s as much of a choice as whether one is gay or straight, so why not?
Now that it’s clear sexuality isn’t a choice, it brings us straight back to the issue of “sin”. If it’s not a choice, it can’t be considered a sin. Sin is a value judgment, and that is why one thing can be socially acceptable in one country or culture, and utterly taboo in another. There are very few moral absolutes, and these are things like murder, where pretty much all cultures and societies abhor and outlaw such behaviour. Many other things are relative.
The real issue is, just who is being harmed when two consenting adults of the same sex, fall in love and have a relationship? The answer is: No one. The reason things such as murder are universally condemned is because they cause harm. Homosexuality, on the other hand, is a victimless “crime”. What consenting adults do privately has no bearing on me, or anyone else. And really, if you are opposed to gay marriage, it’s quite simple: Don’t marry one! The fact of the matter is that gays are already living in marriage-type relationships and it doesn’t impact on our lives one iota. Legally recognising their unions won’t make a lick of difference to society, but it will mean the world to homosexuals all over.
Some people have tried to compare homosexual relationships with other controversial relationships, such as the incestuous relationship of John and Jenny Deaves, who are biological father and daughter, but (they claim) never knew each other as such. This is comparing apples with oranges. Incestuous unions DO stand to cause harm, as evidenced by the high rate of birth defects among related couples. Gay unions pose no such threat.
Another myth I would like to challenge is the mistaken belief that homosexuals are child molesters. While it is indeed possible for anyone, regardless of sexual orientation, to be a child molester, the reality is that the vast majority of kiddy diddlers are, in fact, heterosexual men. Not only has every major study shown that 90 to 98 per cent of offenders are male, but most are, indeed, straight males. Yes, I have statistics from an Australian government website to back this up. Furthermore, if you’re homophobic, chances are you avoid people who are honest about their gay or bisexual orientation, thus further reducing the likelihood of your child being abused by a gay person – after all, a 1996 study showed only eight per cent of people who sexually assaulted children, were unknown. Also considering that far more girls are abused than boys, and most abusers are male, it’s clear that parents have MUCH more cause for concern regarding straight male friends and acquaintances, than homosexual strangers.
While we’re considering children, I would also like to point out that any child would be much better off with a loving gay couple as parents, than a dysfunctional straight couple. And as for the objection that children need both a male and female role model, well – single parents are everywhere, but people don’t threaten their lives and liberty for not having a second parent around for the child. The simple fact of the matter is that role models come in all shapes and sizes, and as long as they’re available, role models don’t have to be parent figures. There are plenty of instances throughout history of people growing up without parents of both genders, for a variety of reasons, but I know of no one who killed someone for not having a second parent around the house. The reality is that this is just another baseless excuse that homophobes present, to victimise people they hate.
Among the various absurdities that have been presented as reasons why gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry, a straight friend of mine made a really valid point when he said, “Of course gays should be allowed to marry. Why should straight people be the only miserable ones?!”
He raised a great point, and that is that when a relationship dissolves, the law steps in with specific provisions for married and de facto couples – who are straight, of course. But what of homosexuals whose relationships are no longer? They deserve just as much protection and recognition from the law as anyone else does.
But at the end of the day, the real issue is about love, and about human beings being allowed to legally celebrate and validate their love for, and commitment to, each other. I have demonstrated why the arguments some people posit are flawed. I defy anyone to tell me that genuine love between consenting adults should not be recognised by the law.
Presentation of an Issue: Gay Marriage
My contention is that gay marriage should be legally recognised. There are numerous aspects to this topic, so I will try to cover as many points as possible.
The first point is that gay couples have been cohabitating and living as married couples since time immemorial. Homosexuality is not a new thing – it’s just talked about more these days. Gays will continue to live as married couples whether legally recognised or not. Society will not stop homosexuality by refusing to recognise their unions. To refuse to do so based on the genitalia they possess is petty in the extreme and achieves nothing positive.
Another aspect of the government’s failure to recognise gay couples is when it comes to things such as Centrelink benefits. Straight couples, whether they have walked down the aisle or not, are for all intents and purposes, deemed to be married – and are treated as such. As a result, they frequently receive less in the way of government assistance. Yet gays in the same circumstances receive more, as their relationships aren’t recognised. Yet the anti-gay marriage folks would be the first to complain that this isn’t fair! Pot… Kettle… Black?
In my experience, the people that object most strongly to gay marriage, are also those that object to homosexuality in general. They are also usually the ones who claim that homosexuality is “wrong”, “unnatural”, and “against God”. So, let’s delve into the minefield that is religion!
Firstly, this stance incorrectly assumes that marriage is strictly a religious matter. It is not. Atheists marry all the time, and fewer and fewer marriages are taking place in places of worship. Marriage is a legal contract, and just happens to be a religious rite in some faiths. This is why the law can deem a couple to be divorced, but some faiths will not recognise it.
Secondly, the religious who object to gay marriage also say, “Marriage is for children, and gays can’t have children!” By this logic, infertile and older couples should also be denied the right to marry. At the same time, there are plenty of gay couples who are parents, and thus should be afforded the right to marry. It’s for the children, isn’t it?
Thirdly, the claim that homosexuality is “unnatural”. Something unnatural is that which is not found in nature, and whether these folks like it or not, homosexuality is, in fact, found across as many as 500 species, including gay animal couples who have successfully raised orphaned young of their own species. The figures on homosexual and bisexual animals, as shown by research, are staggering. Among the Australian black swans, gay couples represent one quarter of all the population – and among the American bison, homosexual sex is more common than hetereosexual! It didn’t take terribly much reading for me to conclude that humans are by far the least kinky creatures on this planet. I have an article to that effect, which I won’t read aloud lest the faint of heart should struggle. :)
But the topic of homosexuality among animals wouldn’t be complete without the story of Roy and Silo. Roy and Silo are two chinstrap penguins, who live at the Central Park Zoo in Manhattan. They so desperately wanted their own chicks that they even adopted a rock, which they treated as an egg in every respect. Their chief keeper finally gave them a fertile egg that was in need of care. Roy and Silo are the perfect parents. They now have a daughter, Tango, who they raised to maturity.
At a different zoo in Germany, four female penguins had to be introduced to the flock, when zookeepers realised that six of their penguins were, in fact, all males, living paired off in homosexual unions. The introduction of the girls had no impact – the male penguins weren’t interested and remained in their original relationships – and as it happens, the girls weren’t that into them, either. Additional males have since been flown in so that the girls can find mates! Clearly, homosexuality and bisexuality isn’t just natural – it’s astoundingly common.
Now, the matter of “sin”. “Sin” refers to an offence against a deity – that is, the breaking of a religious law. So essentially, those that say homosexuality is a sin, are also begging the question that not only does a god exist, but it’s the god they believe in, who dictates the laws according to their religious beliefs. It is only some religions that have this taboo, not all. Some deities (and thus, their religions) that condone homosexuality and bisexuality, or even have homosexual or bisexual deities, include:
• Zeus, the Greek King of the Gods, had affairs with both women and men, such as Ganymede.
• Astarte, the Great Mother. Her temple staff included a caste of gay male priests called the kelabim.
• Pan, the patron god of shepherds and god of nature, is famous for his sexual prowess with both maidens and shepherds. Pan is also reported to have had relationships with younger, teenage boys.
• Inanna had a creature neither male nor female rescue her from the underworld, named Asushunamir. This is sometimes regarded as the origin of the queer ones.
• Apollo has often been seen as bisexual, as he has been associated with the hyacinth (the traditional flower symbolic of homosexuality). He may have also been sexually involved with a man bearing that same name (Hyacinthus) in Greek myth.
Buddhism and various forms of Paganism are quite accepting of homo- and bisexual people as well, with Buddhism’s main caution being against sexual behaviour that could harm others – regardless of gender.
Since we live in a predominantly Christian culture, let’s take a look at what Christian scripture actually says about homosexuality. Now, I deliberated over whether to include any scriptural reference at all, and decided that I should at least touch on one simply because many of those who object to gay marriage, justify their objections with scripture. I found four references – two from Jewish scripture (what Christians refer to as the “Old Testament”), and two from Christian scripture (the Christian “New Testament”). To delve in and explain each one would take me well over the ten-minute mark, so what I have done instead, is print the article I found on the topic, and make it available for anyone who wants to read it.
That said, the most common scriptural objection is the one that refers to Sodom and Gomorrah. Since this one is brief, I will talk about it, and leave the others for those who care to read.
So, Sodom and Gomorrah: A lot of religious folks like to warn of how God wiped out Sodom due to homosexuality. But what does the scripture actually say?
The story can be found in Genesis, chapters 18 and 19. In chapter 18, we’re told that Sodom is a town full of wickedness, but we’re not told exactly what it is that makes them so wicked. In chapter 19, we’re told of two angels visiting Lot and his family. That evening, “all the men of Sodom” rock up at Lot’s doorstep and demand that Lot’s visitors be sent out so that the men could “know them”. Lot pleads with them not to do this – and Lot offers the entire population of men in the town, his TWO VIRGIN DAUGHTERS INSTEAD! And here are Christians saying that homosexuality is wrong! But that’s a side issue. The men continue to make their demands, and threaten Lot with the same fate as his guests should he not comply, at which point, angelic intervention sees the offending men blinded.
Now, nowhere in this tale is homosexuality explicitly condemned. Rather, sexual immorality is condemned, as is gang rape. That is much more believable a condemnation. In fact, Ezekiel 16:48 says that, “This was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.” Later on in Christian scripture, Jude sees the sin as seeking to interbreed with angels, which is something God was seen to be rather unimpressed with elsewhere – in Genesis chapter 6, verses 1 to 8.
There is a peculiar belief among some folks that sexual preference is chosen. On the surface it seems odd, but there is a reason for it: if sexual preference isn’t chosen, it can’t be deemed a sin. Therefore, since it is a sin, it must also be a choice. This is circular logic at its finest. It’s a sin because it’s chosen, and it’s chosen because it’s sin. This rationale raises a very interesting point. The standard belief among most Christians is that God is perfect. The dictionary defines perfect as:
1. Lacking nothing essential to the whole; complete of its nature or kind.
2. Being without defect or blemish: a perfect specimen.
3. Pure; undiluted.
So now I ask you: Does God make mistakes? How is it possible for an all-knowing, all-powerful god to make an error? After all, if he is errant, he is not perfect.
If the contention remains that God is perfect and does not err, and he is the creator of all there is, then homosexuals are behaving EXACTLY as God intended.
From this point, the usual response is along the lines of God being perfect, but humans being fallible and sinful, etc. I am not saying that humans don’t make mistakes or do bad things, but sexuality cannot be chosen. It is hardwired into us. You are what you are. And if God did indeed create us, and does not make mistakes, then he created homosexuals on purpose.
This, of course, is not a popular view among Christians in general, and to that end, various denominations have established “treatment” facilities, to straighten gays out, as it were. Time and again it has failed, with some people never changing, and others returning to their true nature later on.
Sexuality isn’t chosen. When I encounter homophobes, I like to ask them, “How old were you when you decided to be straight?” They usually stare blankly and reply, “Huh? I didn’t.” Precisely. I didn’t reach puberty and deliberate over which sex I felt attracted to. It just came naturally. I just happened to be straight – and gays just happen to be gay. The reason so many of them agonise over their sexuality in their teen years is because of the social implications being gay has – but it’s not something they choose. If there’s anyone unconvinced, I invite them to volunteer to be “treated” to turn gay. Heck, I’ll volunteer. Turn ME gay! I didn’t think so.
If being gay is a choice, I ask you to consider one more thing: Why would anyone CHOOSE to be a pariah, be discriminated against, shunned, disowned, beaten or even murdered? Doesn’t sound like a life anyone would choose if there were a better option.
Roy and Silo the penguins aren’t the only gay parents to have successfully raised children. I personally have friends who were raised by homosexual parents, and who themselves grew up to be straight. Between that and the fact that straight parents raise children who grow up to be gay, it should be clear that sexuality isn’t chosen, but is hardwired in our very beings.
Ask yourself this: Would you deny people the right to marry just because they had green eyes? It’s as much of a choice as whether one is gay or straight, so why not?
Now that it’s clear sexuality isn’t a choice, it brings us straight back to the issue of “sin”. If it’s not a choice, it can’t be considered a sin. Sin is a value judgment, and that is why one thing can be socially acceptable in one country or culture, and utterly taboo in another. There are very few moral absolutes, and these are things like murder, where pretty much all cultures and societies abhor and outlaw such behaviour. Many other things are relative.
The real issue is, just who is being harmed when two consenting adults of the same sex, fall in love and have a relationship? The answer is: No one. The reason things such as murder are universally condemned is because they cause harm. Homosexuality, on the other hand, is a victimless “crime”. What consenting adults do privately has no bearing on me, or anyone else. And really, if you are opposed to gay marriage, it’s quite simple: Don’t marry one! The fact of the matter is that gays are already living in marriage-type relationships and it doesn’t impact on our lives one iota. Legally recognising their unions won’t make a lick of difference to society, but it will mean the world to homosexuals all over.
Some people have tried to compare homosexual relationships with other controversial relationships, such as the incestuous relationship of John and Jenny Deaves, who are biological father and daughter, but (they claim) never knew each other as such. This is comparing apples with oranges. Incestuous unions DO stand to cause harm, as evidenced by the high rate of birth defects among related couples. Gay unions pose no such threat.
Another myth I would like to challenge is the mistaken belief that homosexuals are child molesters. While it is indeed possible for anyone, regardless of sexual orientation, to be a child molester, the reality is that the vast majority of kiddy diddlers are, in fact, heterosexual men. Not only has every major study shown that 90 to 98 per cent of offenders are male, but most are, indeed, straight males. Yes, I have statistics from an Australian government website to back this up. Furthermore, if you’re homophobic, chances are you avoid people who are honest about their gay or bisexual orientation, thus further reducing the likelihood of your child being abused by a gay person – after all, a 1996 study showed only eight per cent of people who sexually assaulted children, were unknown. Also considering that far more girls are abused than boys, and most abusers are male, it’s clear that parents have MUCH more cause for concern regarding straight male friends and acquaintances, than homosexual strangers.
While we’re considering children, I would also like to point out that any child would be much better off with a loving gay couple as parents, than a dysfunctional straight couple. And as for the objection that children need both a male and female role model, well – single parents are everywhere, but people don’t threaten their lives and liberty for not having a second parent around for the child. The simple fact of the matter is that role models come in all shapes and sizes, and as long as they’re available, role models don’t have to be parent figures. There are plenty of instances throughout history of people growing up without parents of both genders, for a variety of reasons, but I know of no one who killed someone for not having a second parent around the house. The reality is that this is just another baseless excuse that homophobes present, to victimise people they hate.
Among the various absurdities that have been presented as reasons why gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry, a straight friend of mine made a really valid point when he said, “Of course gays should be allowed to marry. Why should straight people be the only miserable ones?!”
He raised a great point, and that is that when a relationship dissolves, the law steps in with specific provisions for married and de facto couples – who are straight, of course. But what of homosexuals whose relationships are no longer? They deserve just as much protection and recognition from the law as anyone else does.
But at the end of the day, the real issue is about love, and about human beings being allowed to legally celebrate and validate their love for, and commitment to, each other. I have demonstrated why the arguments some people posit are flawed. I defy anyone to tell me that genuine love between consenting adults should not be recognised by the law.
