Tuesday, 27 October 2009

• Protecting the sanctity of marriage

  Note: I read this article in my school's newspaper, and I felt it would be great thing to talk about here on Xanga.
  
  Last year, Californians voted and passed Proposition 8, which added a new section to the state constitution, defining marriage as only between a man and a woman. With its passing, homosexuals were no longer allowed the right to marry in the state. Proponents claimed that marriage is a fundamental part of society, and that allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry would demean and defile its meaning. They said that a marriage represented a sacred bond between two people, a bond that should only be shared between a male and female. John McCain, who was obviously running for president at the time, even released this statement in support of it.
  
  Now, a website has been launched (http://rescuemarriage.org/) proposing the 2010 California Marriage Protection Act, which in a nutshell says that divorce is a threat to the santity and sacredness of marriage, and that it is unnacceptable in any case where the two parties are still alive. Now, anyone who visits the website or looks at the various PSA's in support of it on Youtube, can obviously see that the whole campaign is somewhat satirical in nature. In fact, I am almost sure that the website was created by people who were opposing Prop. 8. But the idea did get me thinking.
  
  Which is a bigger threat to the sanctity of marriage? Gay marriage or divorce? In my opinion, Proposition 8 passed so easily because gay marriage was an issue that did not directly involve the majority of people, aka heterosexuals. No heterosexual was ever going to get a gay marriage, so voting yes on Prop 8 was an easy thing to do. But now this new bill, The 2010 California Marriage protection act, real or not, directly affects heterosexuals. Would the people of California fight so passionately to protect the sanctity of marriage this time around?
  
  Another question that popped into my head was if people who voted yes on Prop 8 really wanted to protect marriage, or if they actually wanted to limit the rights of homosexuals. And if people simply wanted to limit the rights of California's gay community, that is just plain wrong in my opinion, and in direct violation of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
  
  I also understand that making gay marriage illegal doesn't cover as many underlying issues as divorce. What about abusive marriages? Should any man or woman in an abusive relationship have the option for divorce? I was reading an article in Awake! (you know, that little magazine that Jehovah's Witnesses are always giving out) and it said that any and all problems within a marriage aren't excuses for divorce, they are rather tests that a couple must go through and endure in order to make their relationship stronger. In the end however, marriage is marriage, and divorce is divorce, which breaks that bond between a man and a woman, a bond that is supposedley sacred and needs to be protected.
  
  What do you think? Is someone a hypocrite if they vote yes on Prop 8 and vote no on the 2010 California Marriage Protection Act?
  

  • 11:54 PM
  • 3 Views
  • 2 eProps
  • 1 Comment