Do you think the gay marriage issue being discussed ad nauseum in California is about the civil rights of a group of people? Do you think the whole debate is centering around a religious issue? Do you doubt it’s purely a political issue? Do you think it compares to civil rights movement of women and blacks?
Well, if you listened to the talking heads on the Left you would. But it’s absolutely not about anything more than a political ploy by a small minority of radicals hell-bent on removing any social or moral decency from our culture. Unlike the vitriolic mess the Left is spewing, I’ll back up my statements with facts.
Is it about civil rights of a group of citizens? They say it is simply to define the discussion (much like calling pro-abortion advocates “pro-choice”). Gay marriage is not a matter of civil rights. Here’s why. In September, 2003, California Governor, Gray Davis signed a bill into law recognizing gay civil unions. The effect of this law grants rights ranging from adopting children to filing joint state income-tax returns for gay partners. Additionally, gay couples now have the right in California to make medical decisions in the hospital or act as a conservator, inherit property without a will, administer an estate, seek compensation for the loss of economic or social support, relocate with a domestic partner without losing unemployment benefits, use sick leave to care for a family member or provide them with employer-based health coverage without additional taxation, file disability benefits on behalf of an incapacitated partner, adopt a partner?s child using the stepparent adoption process, continue health coverage for surviving domestic partners of retired government workers.
So they began advocating gay marriage as a way to obtain rights only granted to heterosexual couples. They got them, and they’re continuing to fight for legal recognition of ‘marriage’ for gay couples. Why? They got the legal rights. But it’s not enough for these “progressive” radicals. Their ultimate goal is to abolish any sense of tradition and value, and the first target is the historical union of marriage, because it represents a lifestyle they do not choose to participate in. They’re now attempting to “undefine” marriage…. not redefine it as they’d have you believe, but undefine. They want the definition of marriage, which is “union between a man and a woman” to not mean that anymore. Period.
It’s a shame they’re comparing their fight to slavery, rights of blacks and woman, because it cheapens those very powerful movements. This is nothing more than a group of people who wish to define their entire existence around their choice of sex partners. This isn’t about inalienable rights or the freedom of man not to be a possession of another. This is about a group of people who’ve carved out a special definition of their own group based on who they sleep with. There is nothing inherent or God-given about the rights the seek… hence, they’re seeking “special” rights.
The far Left has learned over the years that the best way to get a controversial issue before the general public is to either act so outrageous to gain media exposure or find liberal activist judges who want to make laws from the bench. They know the majority of Americans disagree with their immoral, unethical or illegal actions, which means the majority of elected legislative representatives will not see things their way. So they find a handful of activist judges to deliver completely misguiuded judgments, which are then tossed into the news media because they’re so far-fetched, and voila, the radicals have their stage.
This is not about civil rights… they got those in the Fall of 2003 from Gray Davis. No, this is just another way to attack traditional, moral values. Is this the group you want in charge of the country you raise your children in? Not me.