Tag Archives: lesbian

I’m Gonna Need Some’a Y’All to Shut Up

3 Replies

Opponents of same-sex marriage have some arguments they like to fall back on a lot. Never mind that most of them fall into wet, sloppy shreds if you apply even the smallest amount of critical thinking.

marriage-equality-symbolThere’s the famous “slippery slope” theory that tells us gay marriage will lead to legalized pedophilia and bestiality and incestuous marriage between first-order relatives. Of course, because same-sex relationships and marriage are between consenting adults, there is no correlation to pedophilia and bestiality. And also, on the topic of animals, same-sex intimacy is actually pretty common in various species, and rarely do they fuck up fellow members of their species for indulging in such acts. As for legalized incest or incestuous marriage, it also isn’t anywhere near the same thing, as some kind of coercion or control is often in play, making the whole consent thing questionable from the get-go. Also, you’ll be hard-pressed to find any cultures through the ages that smile when incest takes place. It is typically taboo.

Speaking of history, there’s the argument that historically, there is no precedent for same-sex marriage. Hell, I used that one myself in younger years, even though I knew damned well that in various cultures, ancient Greece being the most well-known, there is much history of homosexual liaisons and full-fledged open relationships being not just condoned but often encouraged. Also, I’ve become aware of the fact recently that in the early Christian church, there are documented cases of same-sex marriage ceremonies taking place.

But, when all else fails, there’s the trump card, right? Same-sex marriage shouldn’t exist because marriage exists for the purpose of raising kids.

Now, this is the point where many people, even those who aren’t sure about letting men marry men and women marry women, might point out that many people get married with no intention of having children and many infertile people get married, and same-sex opponents have no problem with that.

That, of course, is because the people spouting that theory of marriage-is-all-about-spawning will tell you that people can change their minds about having kids and infertile people sometimes (though with vanishingly slim odds and a frequency that comes close to “never”) do end up conceiving.

But you know what, even though I think the argument of marriage being only about raising biological kids is stupid, I’m prepared to let the same-sex marriage opponents have it…and back them up on their refusal to allow same-sex marriage…if they make some fundamental(ist) and necessary changes to marriage laws nationwide.

Here’s what has to happen:

  • If you are married but have no children, you cannot get the tax benefits for being married.
  • If you are married but have no children, and your spouse dies without a will in place, the inheritance will go to blood relatives. If none exist, the state gets it all.
  • If you are married but have no children, you will have to go through a much more complex and difficult process to adopt than those with children do, because marriage is for the purpose of actually having kids and you haven’t proven yourself by doing that yet.
  • If you are married but have no children, you must defer to blood relatives of your spouse on any matters like surgical consent, end-of-life decisions and other major health and legal matters.
  • Once you no longer have any minor-aged children, you lose all the benefits of marriage as noted above.
  • Adopted children don’t count, as marriage is for the purpose of spawning families, not acquiring them.

So, once those changes are in place, you same-sex marriage opponents have my backing. Because then, you’ll finally be practicing what you preach about what marriage really is about.

Ken & Ted, Sittin’ in a Tree…

Leave a reply

Over dinner tonight, Mrs. Blue announced that as of earlier in the evening, when she was playing with the Barbie-type dolls with Little Girl Blue, Ken left Barbie and entered into a relationship with Ted (Ted being a large Indiana Jones action figure missing one boot, and the booted foot half-gnawed off by who-knows-what animal of who-knows-what former owner of the doll).

This probably didn’t shock me as much as it might have on any other night.  Both dolls were buck-naked the previous day when Little Girl Blue was playing with them, while the 8 or 10 dolls that were women remained stylishly attired.

In any case, I have no problem that my wife helped maneuver Ken and Ted into a same-sex relationship (for now…you know how transitory these celebrity doll relationships are…). Two of our best friends are gay and raising a daughter together (who happens to be one of my daughter’s best friends). The doll relationships should mirror some semblance of reality, even if their wardrobes, homes and cars are too fabulous for imaginary individuals of questionable employment status.

Nope, I have no problem with Ken and Ted being gay, bisexual, bi-curious, heteroflexible and/or homoflexible.

What I have a problem with is the blithe manner in which my wife disregards that Barbie is now forlorn and abandoned. She’s emotionally bereft.

And yet with all those fabulous female dolls (Ken and Ted are the only guys among that style of doll; the action figure guys are just too small in stature to be trying to get with Barbie), including several Disney princesses (and one Spice Girls doll who no longer has any identifiable neck and thus slightly resembles an emaciated linebacker), did my wife hook Barbie up with anyone?

No.

This is heinous and unjust.

Now, as to whether I feel this way because (a) I want to support the “L” in the suddenly LGBT environment among some of the dolls, (b) I’m concerned about Barbie’s well-being and feelings, or (c) because I have the same desire as most guys to imagine woman-on-woman action at least a few times a day…well, I’ll leave that to your own guesses, judgment and imagination.

Same Sex…So What?

5 Replies

two-guysI realize I’m a bit late coming to the whole Proposition 8 party. And I’ve been hesitant since starting this blog to post about the issue of whether homosexuality is or isn’t a sin, simply because it is so easy to get misunderstood on this issue. Passions do run high on both sides of the issue.

But, I’d be a bit of a wuss to just go and hide under a rock and pretend I don’t have thoughts or opinions on the topic. Lord knows I’ve stuck my nose into a lot of other sexual areas (literally and figuratively).

First, let me ask this of anyone who’s felt a need to point out to homosexuals that the Bible calls homosexuality an “abomination before God” and other such stuff: When was the last time you went all-out and told your friends and neighbors to:

  • Stop gossiping?
  • Stop coveting other people’s stuff?
  • Stop lying?
  • Stop bitching about how awful your parents are?
  • Tell your spouse about that affair you’re having?

OK, it might be that some of you have done all that on a regular basis and if so, great, at least your hypocrisy level is not too out of whack, if it’s out of whack at all. Because all those other things are sins. In fact, they are all sins that are part of the Ten Commandments. I find it interesting that that’s God’s top-ten list and homosexuality doesn’t make it in there. Nor does Jesus ever preach against homosexuality that I recall.

Also, while there are many places in the Bible in which man-on-man sex is specifically decried, nowhere, to the best of my knowledge, is lesbianism declared a sin. I don’t simply mean that this is one of those situations where one can infer that the woman is supposed to follow the same rule; I mean that man-on-man sex is so specifically addressed that it is virtually impossible to substitute “woman” for “man.” So, you can imagine that I am somewhat torn on how seriously to take the sin of homosexuality. (Of course, men were involved with the writing of the Bible and sometimes, human failings find their way into the Bible…maybe it’s genetic that us guys dig girl-on-girl sex.)

I acknowledge that God made us primarily and overwhelmingly for the purpose of getting together as man and woman. That is clear from the anatomy. Our natural, default state is to go hetero. Hard to argue against that.

But is homosexuality a sin? It’s a harder sell to me in some ways, but it is mentioned as a no-no in the Bible an awful lot of times. I’ve heard arguments that biblical prohibitions against homosexuality were actually against religious rituals that involved homosexual sex, and not against homosexuality specifically. Under that agument, which has some holes I must admit, it would be more an idol worship/other-gods-before-me situation that was being targeted.

I’ve also heard people make the case that there is a difference between engaging in homosexual sex (from time to time) and being in a homosexual lifestyle. That also seems slim to me, as it would still violate the rules against fornication in the former case, whereas someone could at least argue that a committed gay couple was married. So, fornication in the former case and possibly a sin of homosexuality in the latter.

Again, the issue is pretty messy.

But my basic view is this: I don’t care if you are gay or lesbian.

I just don’t. I care if you are a basically decent person. And from the standpoint of being concerned about your eternal future, I care much more whether you are born again (though I’m not going to shove Jesus on you forcibly) than I do what kind of consenting adults you sleep with. I have known many gay and lesbian people in my life. Some of them acquaintances, some of them simply co-workers or work associates, some of them friends. No close relatives that I know of, but I have more than a hundred cousins and second cousins, so clearly there are numerous gay or lesbian folks in my family somewhere. What they do in their bedrooms or anywhere else with their bodies is between God and them and their partners. Not me. I have friends and relatives who engage in sex outside marriage, too. And who have told many a lie. They are still my friends and my beloved family, and if I judge them at all, I judge them by their overall actions, not individual ones. Not, of course, that it is my place to judge anyway.

And, I don’t fear gay marriage. It is no way whatsoever impacts on my life or my marriage or my religious beliefs. It is not a threat. I do agree with folks who say that a firm line must be drawn somewhere in marriage laws as to how far we can go. Multiple spouses needlessly complicates an already complicated system around divorce, inheritance and custody, in my opinion. Incest is just plain icky (though I have to admit I don’t have any logical argument against why two siblings, as adults, couldn’t choose to be together aside from biblical prohibitions). Marrying animals is even more problematic than multiple spouses. Marrying minors there is no excuse for, nor is there any excuse for having sex with them.

But gay marriage? A union between two adults who aren’t related? I just don’t see a reason to argue against it from any reasonable standpoint of a secular government in a pluralistic and very diverse nation.

Homosexual sex. Homesexual marriage. Not my business. Not a fight I feel needs to be fought. Are they sins? Maybe. I guess. Probably. If for no other reason than I can’t see a biblical basis for same-sex marriage in the church, and therefore homosexual sex would still be premarital sex (of which I myself have been guilty before getting married, over and over again) from that religious-marriage standpoint—though not from a secular-marriage standpoint, of course, in places where same-sex marriage is legal.

But if gay sex is a sin, I cannot categorize it as anything worse than any other sin: Lying, coveting, cheating, failing to honor parents, etc. And before any numb-nut says, “Oh, so I guess murder isn’t some big sin either in your book,” let me just shut you up now. Murder, assault, theft, false witness and adultery, for example, cause direct and purposeful harm against another person. As such, I will have a more visceral reaction and want those things to stop and, in most of those cases be prosecuted (except for adultery) because they are hurtful to another. Whom does homosexuality hurt? If anyone, the person doing it. But it doesn’t hurt me or any innocent bystanders, now does it?

Below are some posts recently about the Proposition 8 issue. I include them here not only because I think they are solid posts with a lot of good and/or thought-provoking comments by readers of the blogs (aside from some anonymous dickhead trolls), but also because I have posted my own comments at some of these blog threads about my various thoughts regarding homosexual marriage and some other gay/lesbian issues, and rather than go through all of what I said there by copy-pasting here, you can go there and see some of my other views on the issues in context, along with the views of a bunch of other people, many of whom are smarter and more eloquent than I.

Forever Hold Your Peace (Deus Ex Malcontent)

While We Were Celebrating (Raving Black Lunatic)

Faux Marriage and Legal Definitions Do Matter (Caffeinated Thoughts – I actually didn’t comment on the second of those two posts; only the first one)

Proposition Hate (The Field Negro – Didn’t comment here because I didn’t see much need for me to add anything to the already lively discussion)

The View Needs Glasses (Margaret and Helen – I don’t believe I commented here; too easy to get lost since there are so many comments on her posts most days)

P.S. If the guys in the image I used here aren’t gay and are sensitive about their sexual orientation being questioned, my apologies. Screw that, I don’t apologize. That was an image I paid for, I get to determine usage, and that looks like a 50/50 chance it’s a romantic stroll on the beach to me… 😉