Gays deserve marriage right

  • Follow Letters

Cal Thomas’s recent column describing his opposition to gay marriage reiterated some familiar arguments.

First, allowing gay citizens to marry would force the law to recognize other kinds of marriage, like polygamy, marriage between siblings, etc. Second, gay marriage is wrong because the Bible condemns homosexuality as immoral. The first argument cannot justify continued discrimination against homosexual couples. The latter is a personal matter to which people are entitled, but has no place in a government meant to serve all people.

Marriage is a civil right that most Americans can enjoy. To deny this to couples because of sexual orientation, it must be shown that there is a demonstrable harm to society in failing to do so. No research shows that children raised in gay households suffer harm from it. What matters is that a child has loving, supportive parents, regardless of sexuality.

The rest is a matter of how consenting adults choose to live their lives.

What opponents of marriage equality must answer is the question of discrimination. Not allowing homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couples is discrimination based on sexual orientation. Why shouldn’t a gay person be covered under his/her partner’s insurance? Or allowed to visit them in the hospital? Or accept legal custody over their children? These are the questions that opponents of gay marriage must answer.

Refusing to grant gay relationships the same rights as heterosexuals under the law is indefensible. Gay people want to have the right to devote their lives to one another with the same level of commitment as anyone else, and to have the state recognize that devotion. Prejudice is no excuse.

Daniel Barden

Martinez

Comments (99) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
burninater
9583
Points
burninater 03/17/13 - 01:18 am
5
11
It's been increasingly

It's been increasingly difficult for me to go to my favorite Thai restaurant lately.

See, the pile of horses beaten to death at the Chronicle offices next door has spilled out of the premises, flowed over the sidewalk, and is now taking up the first few rows of parking out front.

karradur
2854
Points
karradur 03/17/13 - 03:20 am
4
8
@burninater

It's a great restaurant though, isn't it?

I can't wait to see how many comments this letter gets today and how many attempts will be made to defend what Mr. Barden rightly calls an "indefensible" position.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 03/17/13 - 06:23 am
12
2
Yes......

We definately need to stop descriminating against gay couples; in not allowing them to have biological children. Oooh, wait....thats NATURE that descriminates against them. Dang that natural order, it must be done way with immediately. Hey, I say we vastly increase our carbon dioxide levels, in order to intentionally destroy nature; because nature is bigotted and discriminatory. How DARE nature make the decision who naturally procreates and who doesn't. It MUST be done away with. We must give scientists more resources to develop a way for gay couples to naturally procreate and stop this discrimination.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 03/17/13 - 06:36 am
9
3
"Why shouldn’t a gay person

"Why shouldn’t a gay person be covered under his/her partner’s insurance? Or allowed to visit them in the hospital? Or accept legal custody over their children? These are the questions that opponents of gay marriage must answer."

Ok, I shall answer them but you won't like the answer AT ALL.
1) There are insurance companies who allow you to put ANYONE on your policy, WHEN YOU PAY FOR IT. Example is my work; I have the family plan and did NOT have to provide a marriage certificate to get the family plan. I just gave the names and ages AND pay an extra $240.00 a month for the family plan. I could even put my mother on it, IF I pay the extra charge.

2) Since when has the government banned people from visiting a loved one in the hospital? Last time I checked, that was the specific hospital policy, established by THEM; not a government agency. They have numerous different rules for each situation. There are times that only one or two persons are allowed in the room with the patient. There are times NO visitors are allowed, according the what the doctors think is best for the patient. There are times a room FULL of people are allowed. This is a idiotic argument, and just is NOT true.

3) Legal custody of their children?? If they were gay from birth, as they CLAIM they are, then they don't have children; at least not biological children, it's impossible; decided by nature, not men.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 03/17/13 - 07:00 am
10
3
"Gay people want to have the

"Gay people want to have the right to devote their lives to one another with the same level of commitment as anyone else, and to have the state recognize that devotion. Prejudice is no excuse."

Now gay couples can't devote their lives to one another without the State giving them permission? Hmmmm, I didn't know the State was in the business of controlling peoples emotions. But hey, with this currect administration and the direction this Country is headed, that might not be far fetched. Yes sir; I can see Obama, Pelosi, Reid and Feinstien legislating you can only love people that are progressive thinkers; those stuck in the old traditions aren't worthy of giving or receiving love.

In reference to guns recently, Feinstien said "Why do people NEED such firepower?" Well, my question would be "Who do you think you are to tell citizens what they NEED? You're just a citizen the exact same as me; and elected citizen of course, but a citizen none the less. When does my neighbor get to tell me what I can and can't have? They are a citizen also, so why can't they?" Next they will be saying "Why do they need so much love?"

Yes, that is ridiculous; about as ridiculous as saying the State prevents you from devoting your life to another human being. I work this area contantly and my job allows me to meet MANY people. In just this area; there are hundreds, if not thousands of couples who've been together for 20+ years, without the need of a marriage license. Gays should NEVER be descriminated against for devoting their lives to each other; BUT this State and many others have developed and established guidelines and standards for marriage; Lets keep it that way!! If you don't stand for something, you WILL fall for anything; and that is exactly what will happen when we start reducing the standards.

Is we are allows trashing standards set, there is NO LIMIT to how far we will go. Stardards are established and there will ALWAYS be factions of society that don't like the standards, but the standards must stand regardless. If we bend to each group who wants it changed; again there is no limit.

Yes, there are actual cultures in THIS COUNTRY that feel it's perfectly fine to have sex with children. Are we to bend for them as well? You can bet they sitting back and praying that gay marriage wins, because they will fight for their "rights" next. They KNOW it will open the door for their beliefs as well.

On this topic; I say NATURE has established a perfect standard, which mankind has adopted. That standard is that a man and woman, baring any HEALTH CONDITIONS, can naturally procreate. Two perfectly healthy hetrosexuals CAN procreate but two perfectly healthy homosexuals CAN NOT, PERIOD. This is the greater good over emotions; to help replentish the earth and continue the species. Whats the greater good in gay relationships? To be continued......because I know I will get blasted for this stance.

Dixieman
14943
Points
Dixieman 03/17/13 - 07:21 am
7
3
2,089,772 POINTS

I take the moderate position on this issue. I do not believe gays should be able to marry. However, let's change the law so they can get engaged. This will offend both sides and give them an excuse to get angry and to post responses in this always enlightening forum.

RMSHEFF
16001
Points
RMSHEFF 03/17/13 - 07:55 am
11
3
At Least Be Honest

This issue is not about rights. If it were about rights the issue would already be settled. You could give identical rights to gays with simple legislation. The issue is the label you assign to the union and wether it is accepted and called marriage. Acceptance is the goal . Marriage has always been defined as a union between a man and a woman. This definition flows from the Word of God and is an institution ordained by God ( Holy Matrimony) This is where the resistance come in. Homosexuals are free to live in manner they wish but the one thing missing is calling their relationship "marriage". You can't separate the institution of marriage from the one who ordained it.

deestafford
27607
Points
deestafford 03/17/13 - 08:29 am
10
2
Two points on this

First, there has been no civilization in history that sanctioned homosexual marriage.

Second, as to homosexuals raising children. It has been proven through many studies that children benefit most when reared in a home with a mother and daddy. There are certain things that only a mother can teach a child and there are certain things only a daddy can teach a child. This does not mean that a homosexual acting like they are a male when they are a female or are a male acting like a female fulfills that role. Of course, it's possible to cite some highly isolated examples to the contrary just as it is to point to a single mother doing a good job raising children. However, most of the criminals in prison were raised by single mothers.

All the arguments presented above against homosexual marriage are spot on.

InChristLove
22473
Points
InChristLove 03/17/13 - 08:37 am
9
3
RMSHEFF, I do believe you

RMSHEFF, I do believe you have hit the nail on the head. What happens when you tell a child they can not have something.....they scream and pitch a fit until the adult wears down and gives in. This has never been about rights.

peace4784
117
Points
peace4784 03/17/13 - 08:37 am
0
1
What God has joined together,
Unpublished

What God has joined together, let not , man put asunder. God ordained male and female to marry. Not two males or two females. Nature, normalcy, sanity ordained males to be sexually attracted to females and females to be sexually attracted to males. Homosexuality/Gay is not normal. Abnormal is not equal to normal in a sane society. However, since majority rules, when the insane minority out number the sane majority, homosexuals/Gays will get the right to marry. This will be the final nail in empires coffin.

carcraft
25815
Points
carcraft 03/17/13 - 11:37 am
8
2
LOVE THE STATEMENT "so they

LOVE THE STATEMENT "so they can accept legal custody of THEIR children "! Now please explain to me how two men or two women produce a child with out third party intervention? Please explain to me why the sperm donor (one of the third parties) is on the hook for child support when a gay (lesbian) marriage ended? Of course I will not receive an answer as I haven't one the last three times I brought it up! I ell just wear my moniker of bigot proudly, it proves lack of substance and reality on the part of those that support gay marriage! It really doesn't matter how I feel about it it depends on how courts rule!

TrukinRanger
1748
Points
TrukinRanger 03/17/13 - 09:18 am
0
1
Apparently some of the
Unpublished

Apparently some of the posters don't have a clue.

Insurance: A lot of companies only allow you to include certain family members on your health insurance plans. A gay/lesbian partner is NOT considered a family member under the current laws. Children are allowed up to certain ages and dependent on whether they enrolled in further schooling.

Hospitalization: True- people can visit in most cases. Immediate (spouse/children/mother or father) can visit outside of other times but there can be restrictions. Some hospitals try and run you off, but immediate family can fight that and stay. Also, if the person in the hospital is incapacitated, the next of kin (starting with spouse) is the one with the lawful right to make health decisions on your behalf. If someone knew they were going into the hospital then you can have legal papers drawn up to assist, but how many people have the time to do this during an emergency? Just as there are those of you here that oppose gay relationships- there are also close family members who all of a sudden step up and say THEY have the right to make these decisions when they disagree with the partners and the battles begin. Of course, with no implied legal standing the partner loses. The same partners can be removed from the hospital and their loved one's well being is left up to the biggoted family members.

Children: Many gays know they are gay from the start. Others have feelings they don't understand from youth. They feel pressured by society in grabbing an opposite sex partner, getting married, having children (obviously not always in that order), then 10 years later when they're still not happy realize that they truly are gay/lesbian and the marriage is dissolved. So many gays DO have biological children. In addition, some gay couples can either add to their biological family, or if no biological children are in the picture- start a new family. Adopting children that were abandoned by their heterosexual counterparts is obviously the next choice.

Some people know they are straight or gay from the beginning. Others have a dark cloud they grow up with and don't know what side of the fence they belong. Sometimes they jump the fence to explore options and others just put a gate up. It's not always cut and dry. There are gays or lesbians that spend the majority of their lives fighting with this (look at suicide rates) and don't figure everything out until later in life. No matter how they started their lives once they figure out what makes them happy they should be able to settle down with the person they love. They should have all the rights that opposite couples are given (without question)

Little Lamb
46021
Points
Little Lamb 03/17/13 - 09:29 am
6
3
Bennies

In his next-to-last paragraph we see the gist of Mr. Barden's goal. He wants benefits that some are entitled to, but not all. His examples are poppycock:

Why shouldn't a gay couple be covered under his/her partner's insurance? Well, that married couple who has family coverage is paying a seriously higher premium for the privilege. Two single policies are generally cheaper than one family policy.

And the hospital visitation thing and the children custody thing? A visit to a lawyer can fix those things up. That lawyer bill will be cheaper than a wedding reception.

No, Mr. Darden wants sexual orientation to be codified as a special protected class, such as race, creed, gender. I say we have too many special protected classes in this country and we need to cut down on the bennies. The most discriminated-against class in this country (indeed in the entire world) is the independent individual—the individual intending to live free.

rmwhitley
5547
Points
rmwhitley 03/17/13 - 09:47 am
0
1
In that same
Unpublished

vein, whites deserve to have the voting rights of 16 states restored to normal. As it is now, those 16 states are forced to allow certain organizations affiliated with the voting rights act of 1964 to bus in voters ( ineligible , illegal ) with a promise of financial gain? Me thinks so.

JRC2024
8854
Points
JRC2024 03/17/13 - 10:16 am
8
3
Never ending disagreement.

Never ending disagreement. Rmsheff and In Christs Love have it right. A marriage in God's Eyes and mine will always be between a man and a woman and no law on this land can ever change that.

Jane18
12332
Points
Jane18 03/17/13 - 10:26 am
6
3
Great, Great, Comments!

myfather15, you know the best arguments, I enjoy reading your beliefs, which always agree with mine! And burninator, as long as that "dead horse" continues to be "dragged up"..............................

TrukinRanger
1748
Points
TrukinRanger 03/17/13 - 10:43 am
0
1
It's fine if you believe a
Unpublished

It's fine if you believe a marriage is in God's eyes. But answer this... who signs that marriage certificate and gives you tax credits and rights? Is it signed by God? No, it would be signed by a representative of the government. You can believe what every want religiously - but legal rights are decided by the people, courts, governments. A church does not have to be forced to marry a gay couple- I can understand that.

Dawgfan62
167
Points
Dawgfan62 03/17/13 - 10:45 am
4
6
Religious arguments

The religious argument for banning gay marriage should not be relevant to the discussion as religion has no place in determining public policy. Believe in whom or whatever you want to, but don't hold myself or others to a standard that we may or may not subscribe. There have been some compelling arguments against allowing gay marriage, but the standard argument seems to be that homosexuality is unnatural. If it is so unnatural, why is 8-10 % of our population gay? Is it a choice or did "nature" allow this to occur "naturally"? I am a heterosexual male and it sickens me to see how otherwise gracious and loving people decry another person because of their sexual preference.

Dawgfan62
167
Points
Dawgfan62 03/17/13 - 10:54 am
3
5
Just saying

Myfather15,

At one time standards in this country made slavery legal. Standards prevented women from having the right to vote and prevented African-Americans from drinking from the same water fountain as whites and also prevented them from attending the same colleges as whites. Standards should be changed when they discriminate and in the case of gay marriage current standards discriminate.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 03/17/13 - 10:57 am
4
4
Well, I don't believe nature

Well, I don't believe nature made them that way, so figure out my stance on that. 8-10%?? Hmmmmm, doesn't sound like a natural, overwhelming majority.

Dawgfan62
167
Points
Dawgfan62 03/17/13 - 11:04 am
3
4
Myfather15

So "standards" should be based on a majority's beliefs? If so, that certainly is a scary thought for the people in the minority!

GiantsAllDay
9589
Points
GiantsAllDay 03/17/13 - 11:15 am
6
7
Mr. Barden, the only

Mr. Barden, the only consolation I can give you is that you are on the right side of history. If you would of written your letter to the AC 150 years ago stating that slaves should be freed and blacks should be treated equally, THESE VERY SAME PEOPLE would be quoting the bible saying god allows slavery and blacks are inferior. Huck Finn was told by his preacher that if he gave aid to a slave or helped him to freedom, he would go to hell, but he stood by what was right. Think of yourself as Huck Finn and these commenters as Huck's preacher. As homosexuals get closer to equality under the law, the rants will get longer and louder as they will start running out of people to hate, and when religion starts running out of people to hate, it will have to find something else to do with itself.
Side note: the southern baptist convention was founded in 1845 to defend slavery. It took them a loooooooong time to apologize. Expect the same when equality in marriage is granted down the road.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/story/2012-06-24/relig...

itsanotherday1
43119
Points
itsanotherday1 03/17/13 - 11:12 am
3
3
@ deestafford

Though I am very much libertarian on gay issues; the one thing I have issue with is children. I agree 100% that the best option for any child is a loving mama and daddy.

That said though, I agree with Dr Laura that even though a loving mama and daddy is best, a loving person/couple of any kind is better than no love at all.

Here is where I draw that line: Gay couples going the AI route for lesbians, or adoptions of perfectly healthy newborns that infertile straight couples are standing in line to adopt. That is deliberately bringing a child into a less than ideal environment for their own selfish wants. If they want to share their love with a child, adopt one who has been bounced from foster home to foster home, and just needs a stable home with someone who will love them. I don't have an ounce of issue with that.

carcraft
25815
Points
carcraft 03/17/13 - 11:39 am
3
3
Ah, still no answer! Maybe it

Ah, still no answer! Maybe it isn't a rights thing at all but a legal and societal expectation about marriage gays simply can't fill1

karradur
2854
Points
karradur 03/17/13 - 11:48 am
2
2
@myfather15

What if they're telling the truth?

carcraft
25815
Points
carcraft 03/17/13 - 01:50 pm
2
2
I hope someday the majority

I hope someday the majority removes the standards imposed by gravity (sort of like reproduction marriage is intended to foster and support)! It will be fun to watch them test the boundaries!

InChristLove
22473
Points
InChristLove 03/17/13 - 02:05 pm
5
4
posted by GAD "THESE VERY

posted by GAD "THESE VERY SAME PEOPLE would be quoting the bible saying god allows slavery and blacks are inferior"

This stated is so incorrect and the person making the statement has no idea what "these very same people" would have said about slavery and blacks. Just to inform someone who's BS meter needs fixing, the Bible never condoned slavery and has never support the statement that blacks are inferior.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 03/17/13 - 02:10 pm
4
3
@Dawgfan62

Nice try, but my comment was in response to yours "If it is so unnatural, why is 8-10 % of our population gay?" Ok, so 90% of people are hetrosexual and you want to say 10% make it NATURAL? PLEASE, just accept the FACT that NATURE ruled homosexuality UNNATURAL, not MEN. One could easily say these stats would lean towards proving it a CHOICE. I also didn't say policy should be made by the majority and minorities be treated anyway the majority like.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 03/17/13 - 02:11 pm
1
3
@karradur

What if they're not? This could go on and on; get to your point.

karradur
2854
Points
karradur 03/17/13 - 02:16 pm
3
2
@myfather15

Have you ever asked a homosexual person that you know in real life if their sexuality was a choice?

I'm being completely, absolutely serious here.

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs