Author: Daniel Roberts
So election day has come and gone. Debate over "the issues" has subsided. But reflecting on today's political scene, there is no single campaign issue more befuddling to me than the matter of same sex marriage.
I realize that at a liberal-minded Northeastern institution, where activism is pushed and MOQA is a prominent club, my support of gay marriage is far from unique. So why do I think this opinion is worthy of my weekly column?
Here's the rub: I don't even think that gay marriage should be an issue. Don't get me wrong, this is not because I think it is unimportant. I say that gay marriage should not be an issue because it should be automatic.
"Grey's Anatomy" actor T.R. Knight recently announced he is gay. Shortly after this, Neil Patrick Harris, or as we know him, Dougie Houser, came out. Compare the appropriate, low-key reactions these two received to the tidal wave Ellen DeGeneres caused in 1997, and one can see that being gay in Hollywood has become a small detail. That makes sense, because why should a person's sexual orientation define them? Knight put it best when he declared, "I hope the fact that I'm gay isn't the most interesting part of me."
Knight's statement conveys a "So what?" attitude that reminds us a star's sexual orientation should not be a big deal. The ranks of openly gay actors are growing rapidly, so instead of filing angry lawsuits - ahem, Tom Cruise - actors who may be gay should feel encouraged by quiet rumors to come out. Carrot Top, I mean you.
The openness of gay celebrities adds to my shock that part of our country still revels in bigotry. One terrifying scene of the "Borat" movie happens at a rodeo in Salem, Virginia. Borat tries to thank his host by kissing him, but the man rears in horror and tells Borat he is acting gay. Borat hushes the accusation, "In my country we put them in jail," and the man agrees, "That's what we're trying to do here." Wow. Sacha Baron Cohen's satire shines at times like this, when he tricks people into revealing their prejudices.
At Middlebury, where there is fortunately great tolerance of "alternative" lifestyles, it is easy to forget that parts of the United States have not yet caught up.
Many who oppose gay rights find their basis in the Bible. Well, you'll have to excuse me if I don't see much legitimacy to an argument that draws its logic from "the good Book." In truth, there is no reasonable argument that can be made against gay marriage. Those who oppose it may hide behind theology, but their prejudice's clear for all to see.
At least with the topic of abortion, in which I fully support a woman's right to choose, I can understand and acknowledge the other side's argument. I really can see why someone's morals might lead to being pro-life. With those who oppose gay marriage, however, I see no such reasonable basis.
Let's say a group of people emerged who enjoy eating human flesh, and wanted to petition the government to allow cannibal marriage. In this case I would understand opposition.
I just feel frustrated. I try to follow politics, but I am continually turned off when I hear candidates and elected officials bring up gay marriage, because all I can think is that the issue is a waste of time. There should be no question of whether or not homosexuals deserve the opportunity to marry.
Remember how there was slavery in the U.S., and now we look back on that with shame? One day, people will recall a time when gay marriage was not yet legal, and cringe to think our country was ever so intolerant.
I know this is naive of me, but I wish Congress would smarten up and pass a law that legalizes gay marriage in all 50 states. Then, politicians could deal with subjects of national importance, like the economy or healthcare. Yet gay marriage remains a hot topic, simply because there are still people prejudiced enough to oppose it. Honestly, there are bigger fish to fry.
In My Humble Opinion Bigger fish to fry in life
Comments
