![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I keep thinking about this, then keep forgetting to post it.
Almost all of the arguments presented for allowing gay marriage, and against bans on same, focus on it from the angle of discrimination and equal protection under the law. The next thing that happens is you have a bunch of people mincing weasel-words and arguing that it isn't really discrimination, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseam.
It seems to me this argument misses a key point. Barring those who just want to argue about the terminology, the people seriously objecting to allowing gay couples to marry, virtually without exception, do so on religious grounds, and more to the point, specifically on capital-C Christian religious grounds. They say it's an abomination in the sight of their god, or some such verbiage.
So, if the law allows a religion to define what marriage is, and the religious definition of marriage allows hetero couples to marry, because that's what the religion in question says they should do, but bars gay couples from marrying because the religion says that's wrong, then the law is being subjugated to that specific religion. Any legal ban on gay marriage dictated by some religion's principles thus becomes a law respecting an establishment of that religion. Bam, direct Establishment Clause violation, clearly unconstitutional, game over. Open-and-shut case.
... Or am I missing something?
Yes, I know that technically the First Amendment constrains only Congress from passing a law "respecting an extablishment of religion, or prohibiting the free expression thereof". And many States feel they don't have to be bound by the Constitution when they don't feel like it — like California, for example, which "does not consider the Second Amendment to be incorporated into the California State Constitution." I have never had the slightest respect for this argument. It amounts to saying, "Yes, we agreed to abide by the Constitution when we joined the Union, but we had our fingers crossed." You want to be a US state? You obey and respect the Constitution. ALL of it. Period. You want to pick and choose which parts of it apply to you? Maybe you think your state should allow slavery, or deny women the vote? Go the hell away and form your own nation.
no subject
I predict that it won't be long before gay marriage is a fact of life in this country. I've lived here half a century, and I've seen a lot of change. Most of it, for the good, despite all expectations.
At the time I was born, women were men's slaves. They'd only recently, in the last thirty years, gotten the vote. The south was completely segregated. Black people had to pee in the alley or drink from some "not white" drinking fountain. They couldn't go to "white" libraries.
Women who were raped or abused had to bear the child of that abuse, raise it, and deal with it for the rest of their lives. And, when I was born, we were just seeing the promise of this land we live in for the first time.
Today, women vote, they have the police on their side when they are beaten up or raped. Blacks can walk on the same streets we do, they don't have to step off the curb or say "yes'm" just to go about their business.
And we have a black president. The road to progress is a very long one. And we'll all have to be very patient to see it through.
I've always said that I don't care about anybody else's sex life but my own. And that's still true. I just have to believe that, in spite of how stupid we all seem, most people feel the same way.
I've seen a shitload of progress in my lifetime. I think I'll see a lot more before it's my time in the crematorium.
no subject