Marriage is defined as
“a relationship between or among individuals, usually recognized by civil authority and/or bound by the religious beliefs of the participants” (
Wikipedia).
It has generally been thought to be a relationship of one male and one female, the primary purpose of which is to produce and rear children.
That’s the model that has traditionally been adopted by Western societies, although historically many other societies have allowed some form of polygamy.
Wikipedia also tells us, “In one form or another, marriage is found in virtually every society. The very oldest records that refer to it speak of it as an established custom.
Despite attempts by anthropologists to trace its origin . . . evidence is lacking.”
With the advancement of gay rights and the drive to legalize same-sex marriage, Western societies, where marriage has generally been defined as a monogamous union, may well be evolving into cultures in which the definition of marriage will be expanded beyond the traditional joining of one man and one woman to include same-sex couples.
This year, National Public Radio (npr.org) covered the issue of same-sex marriage extensively with a number of reports, some of which were headlined as follows:
Gay Marriage Issue Looms over Colorado Race (Oct 15, 2006)
Mass Judge: Out-of-State Gay Couple Can Marry (Sep 29,2006
Gay-Marriage Advocates Regroup After Latest Defeat (Aug 2, 2006)
High Court Rulings and the Future of Gay Marriage (July 18, 2006)
New York, Georgia Courts Disallow Gay Marriage (July 6, 2006)
The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that gay couples must be accorded the same rights as heterosexual couples and that the state legislature has six months to either grant gays the right to marry, or come up with another civil-union type system.
In addition, the California General Assembly became the first state legislature to approve same-sex marriages.
Those who oppose such unions on religious or moral grounds are often called “bigots.” But, it seems to me that bigotry is in the eye of the beholder.
A “bigot” is defined (by Wikipedia) as “a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from their own.” The word is commonly used to denigrate those who are unwilling to change their opinion(s) even when faced (presumably) with evidence that they are incorrect.
My own view is that the word “bigot” has become an epithet that is used to attack people who disagree with a particular point of view, belief or value. However, to paraphrase Forrest Gump, a bigot is as a bigot does.
Is any person who does not agree with you (or me) a “bigot”?
I think not.
It seems to me that what’s missing in the definition is the element of prejudice, that is, bigots are prejudiced against another, or others, for a variety of reasons, i.e., race, ethnic background, religious beliefs, education (or lack thereof), social or economic status, moral values, or almost any aspect of their ideas, attitudes or principles.
But, those who so easily label others as bigots are often guilty of the same conduct, that is, they themselves are bigoted against anyone who is unwilling to accept their particular point of view. As I said earlier, “a bigot is as a bigot does.”
The painful truth is that everyone is bigoted to some degree about some things, which is to say that they have strong opinions about certain matters and are unlikely to change them, even in the face of what others may consider proof positive that they are wrong. It’s inescapable. But, if we did not have opinions, we would be nothing more than walking marshmallows.
So, where does that take us in the matter of marriage?
Well, for one thing, the education establishment has endorsed homosexuality as a “lifestyle” and is promoting a variety of school programs and activities
that are designed to teach children that homosexuality is not only acceptable, but that it is a matter of equal rights and fairness to “educate” children, some as young as the third or fourth grades, about the benefits of the “gay lifestyle.”
Parents who are not paying close attention to what’s happening in the schools are likely to wake up one day and find that their children have been taught things they strongly oppose.
Linda Harvey, president of Mission America, writing for CSNNews.com, noted that the American Federation of Teachers, the American School Health Association, the National Association of School Psychologists and the American Association of School Administrators have all signed on to the concept of teaching students about homosexuality. She further observed, “…the National School Boards featured a glowing article in a recent newsletter about the great benefits of ‘gay’ clubs in schools.”
Some 2,000 homosexual clubs have already been established in American schools. Groups like the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) and Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) have articulated a goal of establishing “clubs in as many elementary schools as possible using the rationale that these students, who they imply were probably born this way, need ‘support systems’ to avoid harassment and discrimination.”
Can gay and lesbian dolls in toy stores, children’s books and school teaching materials be far behind? Gay personalities and characters that are featured
in media, movie and TV stories have already become commonplace.
Those parents, grandparents and citizens in general who overtly resist the effort to normalize gay relationships will no doubt be labeled as “bigots.” But, are they? Or are those who are pushing the “gay lifestyle” bigots for being unwilling to accept the reality that most parents want to be the judge of what their children should be taught about things that are considered to be a personal matter of religious belief, ethics and morality? Which brings us back to the issue of same-sex marriage.
The drive by gays for equal treatment under the law has already led to civil union that extend most if not all the same rights and privileges to same-sex couples, even if a Constitutional amendment is adopted that defines “marriage” as one man and one woman.
Most of the issues in same-sex couple relationships, such as hospital visitation and health care rights, inheritance, property rights (including division of assets in dissolutions), spousal and child support, etc. have been resolved.
About the only thing I can see that will be different is the fact that same-sex marriages are not being religiously sanctified, although some form of marriage ceremony is being conducted by gay or sympathetic clergy.
As for bearing and rearing children, that’s also already happening, either by means of In Vitro Fertilization (in the case of women), surrogate birth or adoption.
Where we go from here, no one knows for sure, but it’s easy to predict that we will see more intense and aggressive efforts in Western societies to force the acceptance of the “gay lifestyle” and same-sex marriage on the population in general.
© 2015 Harris R. Sherline, All Rights Reserved