Why Should We Have to Argue About Gay Marriage? How about We Argue...

Some arguments for gay marriage happen to be: "It's none of their business who I do or don't marry" which is very true. Really think about this, if a gay couple got married down the street how is it going to affect you? I'll tell you how, it's going to affect you just as much as the straight couple down the other side of the street getting married. Probably not going to be a very big deal in your life.

And look at if from another view, how would it feel if people you don't even know, let alone care about, were arguing whether or not you could marry the love of your life? Imagine it, I don't care what your sexuality is (though really, I'm more or less talking about the heterosexuals cause you're the ones arguing whether or not other sexualities can be treated equally).

Hell, isn't it even UNCONSTITUTIONAL? I direct you to the First Amendment, personally my favourite: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or
of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition
the Government for a redress
of
grievances."

The bold part is the important part. The main, and also religious, argument is that it'll destroy the sanctity of, mainly Christian, religious marriage, and that marriage is a religious territory.

If marriage is indeed a religious bond between two people and God, than why the hell is the government involved? Uhm, heterosexuals, whether you're on the yay or nay side of the gay marriage debate... shouldn't this be a little bit more important? In fact, shouldn't the fact that the government has a right to say who we can and can't marry a little distressing than whether or not sexual minorities should marry?

This is where the freedom of speech comes in. This is the freedom of choice, because of this we have a right to be an individual. As an individual, you have a choice to do and say what you want given certain limitations. You have a right to think that homosexual marriage is immoral, and I have a right to think there is nothing wrong with it. You have the right to marry the love of you're life and I should have the right to marry the love of mine.

And this is Congress steps in, and also the problem I may add. While you have your choice, they take away my choice (and if you haven't gotten it by now, yes I am a lesbian). Sure, I can see where where a religious establishment would be concerned in the decision whether or not they'd be allowing homosexual marriages in their establishments, but why the government? And why are they even siding with religion when they should be staying out of private matters? This is a consensual decision between two (or in some cases more) individuals and the religious or non-religious establishment they're marrying through, not "big brother." Why are we arguing whether who should marry who or how many whos they can marry? As long as there is consent, we should only care about so much. Yes, there should be limitations, there is no need for incest or bestiality... or even marrying inanimate objects (lets be honest though, who would SERIOUSLY marry their car?), and there should be a certain age limit you can get married at because I'm positive a 13 year old girl won't make very good wife material, but in general it shouldn't matter to us!

So why should we argue about gay marriage? Shouldn't we be arguing about whether or not the government can tell us who to marry? Shouldn't we be fighting for the privatization of marriage instead of the right to be able or unable to marry?

http://www.slate.com/id/2440/