EDITORIAL: As over 25,000 people across California protested the passage of Proposition 8 this past week, one must step back and take a gander at the larger canvas being created. Let’s be honest with ourselves: Prop 8 is less about marriage and more about institutional practices. A couple needs neither a church nor a government to confirm their relationship, to instate it as “official,” or to even socially accept it. They only need each other. This puts the American practice of marriage into an interesting perspective. Let us not forget history: marriage, in its traditional sense, is built around a business transaction between two families that involves the selling of a woman (“Mrs.” is Mr’s… belonging to Mr.: ownership). Marriage, in its traditional sense, is about gender role prescription and the archaic promulgation of bloodlines (is there really a more disturbing form of discrimination than this? Men downsizing women to baby-machines, the only important thing being that the man’s precious name and blood gets passed on?). Marriage, in its traditional sense, is rather disturbing.
When voters are called on to “protect marriage,” one can’t help but wonder what exactly it is that they are protecting. Racism, sexism, marginality… Those seem to fit for the time being. This is why thousands of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, straights, queers, [insert here] marched throughout great California cities. They were professing acceptance and downsizing hate.
This proposition, however, has another level beyond hate. Hate, as many minorities and women can attest to, is inherent in the American landscape. This is not to say it cannot be eradicated nor diminished, but simply recognizing that we retaliate against others as much as we hold their hands. However, something that many of its citizens also attest to is the fact that America offers compensation for hard work, dedication, and commitment; the possibility to achieve success through a work ethic and innovation. Prop. 8 and America’s stance on marriage is actually completely the opposite of this. With regards to rewarding straight married couples with tax breaks, social acceptance, health benefits, legal authority, and many other benefits, our government is providing these essential rights to those who do essentially nothing. There is no hard work, dedication nor commitment in simply walking into a building, grabbing someone’s hand and saying, “I do.” As if backtracking against the American work ethic, we have decided that life-altering rights should be given to couples for doing something that they had little choice in (straights, just as gays, do not claim they “chose” to be straight), something they wanted to participate in (having children and building a family, for example), something that required little effort on their part. It doesn’t matter whether they have been dating for two days or two decades: “I do” provides all these rights and nothing else.
This diminishes the value of marriage, gay or straight, and puts the concept of marriage on faulty ground. While many are arguing over what forms of marriage should be legal and constitutional, one should really begin to question why the government is involved in any form of sexual relationships, let alone endorsing them and providing rights for those that participate in something that is generally enjoyable. If it is suddenly discovered that having a dog contributes to the stabilization and economic flow of a society, do we begin to provide tax breaks for dog-lovers and exempt those with cats? If it is researched that getting plastic surgery provides monetary benefits to medical research, do we begin to provide medical benefits to those with fake breasts or calve implants? Where does choice come in?
Prop. 8 brings into light far more issues than gay marriage or even hate. We are becoming a meritocracy for those with no merits, for those who did nothing to become that particular status. If you did not choose to be straight, if you have always wanted children even before you knew what pregnancy was, if you’ve been dreaming of marriage since you were a child — please, pray tell, why should you be receiving life-altering benefits for something you essentially had little do with? And why, at the same time, are you rescinding those rights and benefits from those that also say they did not choose to be gay, those who also want children, to those that also dream of marriage? Lastly, what are we advertising to those who are actively single in our society, but nonetheless contribute through their job and social life… Are they inept?
As citizens, we are downsizing what we appreciate by the passage of Prop. 8. We are not promoting longevity in relationships nor stability within families nor contributions to the better of society. We are promoting the ideology that luck-of-the-draw gives you essential human rights. Let’s hope you happen to be born on American soil, happen to be straight, happen to want a married life, happen, happen, happen… Only then can you see your loved on the hospital bed. And don’t forget that tax break you worked so hard for.
By Brian Addison
The views expressed in this editorial are not necessarily those of the lbpost.com or its advertisers.