I have the world’s largest headache as I write this. I had three hours of sleep last night, stressful sleep the night before that, and I keep wondering what it is I’m supposed to be doing. Should be doing. And how to push back.
I read a post on a blog about marriage earlier that I typed a four paged rant, then deleted it, and then wrote this one instead. I am a lot calmer now.
Bear with me, okay? I’m not people bashing.
I am going to be abundantly clear on my stance on marriage, and before I go into that, here are some facts about me:
- I am a woman, as defined by the body parts I was born with.
- I am a mother of 2 children.
- I have a life partner who is, in the eyes of the governments around the world, my husband. Yes, he is the father of my children.
- Both my children were born BEFORE I said the words “I do” in front of the mayor who conducted our marriage ceremony and two witnesses.
- I do not believe in the institution of “marriage” as far as love is concerned.
- I am an LGBTQ equal rights activist.
- I also believe that we are all entitled to our opinions and live by our beliefs.
Now, marriage… is not about love. (I have a feeling I’m going to get flamed for that.)
It is not about showing anyone that you and your spouse “love” each other. Marriage, and that piece of paper that establishes the relation you have with the person whose name is on there with you, is a contract between two people defined by government law (and in many countries between two families) that establishes any and all legal actions that are applicable if any fallout was to happen. People get married mostly for financial reasons and gains. It is about the stability of people groups. And if either party was to “violate” the agreements of this “coming together,” then consequences will ensue.
We all know this list of “violations” – infidelity, abuse, neglect, imprisonment, etc. There are certainly many more, depending on the country one lives in and the laws that country has in place.
Marriage is about rights and privileges granted by the government so parties involved can be protected and other institutions understand how to regulate their clientele.
For example, when I was in the hospital for the delivery of my son, I was not married to my son’s father at the time. For him to be in the delivery room with me, I have to request for him to be there – and I didn’t remember this until he was asked to leave during my epidural. After that incident, I informed everyone in the room that the father of my child is to remain with me at all times and have the right to make any decision regarding my wellbeing if I become incapacitated or incoherent. I was brought documents to sign for this to go into effect. If we had been married, he would not have been asked to leave. This right is only given to married couples – not people in domestic partnership or any other status.
If I was ever incapacitated and in ICU, and not married to my husband, it didn’t matter that he fathered my children, he wouldn’t be able to visit me, be notified by medical professionals about my condition, much less be the person to make decisions about my healthcare. Those related to me by blood would be – parents, siblings, children – but he wouldn’t have those rights unless I put through more paperwork before an incident was to happen. I believe some people believe that to be bad luck.
Another important right given to married couples is the protection from incriminating your spouse. That means one party cannot be forced to offer information against his/her spouse no matter what. This is simply one of the very few reasons my partner and I did get married. As a legal resident, I can become a pressure point against my partner by threat of the removal of my status. As far as my understanding goes, within the United States of America, not even a warrant can override this. Don’t quote me on that. I’m not an attorney.
Health insurance, what I believe is to be the most expensive scam of this country, refuses to add “family” members to an employee’s health insurance plan unless they were married. My husband had insurance coverage. His children had coverage under him, but for years, I didn’t have any. Being his life partner wasn’t enough nor was being the biological mother of his children. Proof that we reside in the same house wasn’t enough. Domestic partnership isn’t accepted. Only married people, and we had to provide a copy of our marriage certificate for that to be accepted. So this would be another privilege not given to anyone unmarried.
Am I getting the point across or do I need to keep adding to the list? *sighs*
Procreation, my dear friends, associates, acquaintances, and family members, is a miracle granted to all species that reside on Mother Earth. It is the result of evolution for the sole purpose of survival, not a “God-given right.” Without it, everything will die out. Whether one was married or not has nothing to do with procreation. Species without a “marriage” ceremony still procreate and reproduce. Some mate for life. Others have multiple partners. Every species have their way of doing things, but that doesn’t mean none of them could have been homosexual. In fact, wolves can be homosexual.
Being able to “procreate” shouldn’t be made special. While it does take a lot for procreation to occur, it still requires everything involved to be perfect for that sperm to meet that egg and continue to stay in specific conditions for a baby to result at the end of 10 months.
I’m over simplifying it, but that is the gist of it.
You know what I believe?
I believe the system of so many different types of people exist because we all need one thing to live a quality life – love. It takes an egg and a sperm for a baby to grow from, but it takes more than that for a baby to survive. It takes community, and the people power required to raise children, hopefully in the best environment possible, is a high ratio per child. That’s why family members are often involved.
Do we not have children in the system from all sorts of backgrounds who do not have a loving, caring home? This is where I want to bring up the issue of nature-versus-nurture. So what if a homosexual couple couldn’t procreate (well, gays anyway. Lesbians have the option of IVF these days)? They have what it takes, regardless if the relationship is monogamous or polygamous, to give these children – all borne from hetero relationships, mind you – that love, care, and security that will hopefully allow them to live full and productive lives.
I would have thought that most governments would be well invested in future citizens capable of earning incomes that will help pay down the national debt instead of doing everything in its power to try to move in opposite directions at the same time.
And before I forget…
“Marriage” comes with risk as much as rewards, mind you, to anyone. If I was to die tomorrow (*knocks on wood*), whatever debt I have incurred becomes the responsibility of my spouse. As an unmarried homosexual (or any other, actually) couple, if things did fall through, they can walk away from each other a lot easier than a married couple, and I assure you, even as a married couple, homosexual partnerships will still be taxed heavier than heterosexual ones.
So in the face of all this, understanding that the battle for the equal right of “marriage” has nothing to do with procreation but have a lot to do with privileges and rights…
(For something as simple as standing at the bedside of a life partner in the hospital as an example and having the privilege to be included in updates… THAT is love.)
…who are we to say no? What do we, as heterosexual couples, lose by letting homosexual couples have what should be their rights and privileges as much as it is ours?
And how do you classify the people born with both sets of genitals? Are they man or woman? Who can they marry? What are their rights? (Well, guess I’ll be doing research tonight.)
There is something good to be gained here by sharing the good with everyone. Change is inevitable, so why can’t we try to make it a change for the better instead?
I’m not trying to be a bigot, or insult anyone’s intelligence (I don’t think I did), but as a realist and an optimist, I hope we can improve and move up the world. Not fail upwards.
❤ Lavender Wynter
This is a bit of a rant against Michelle Bachmann, and in some respects, religion. You have been warned!
When I took a hiatus, the world wasn’t a great place, but I certainly didn’t have this showing up on my Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, and WordPress:
“There’s nothing about gays in there. But the gay community decided to make this their measure,” Bachmann said. “I think the thing that is getting a little tiresome, the gay community, they have so bullied the American people, and they’ve so intimidated politicians. The politicians fear them, so that they think they get to dictate the agenda everywhere.”
“I was sorry that she made the decision, and it’s because I believe that tolerance is a two-way street and we need to respect everyone’s rights, including the rights of people who have sincerely held religious beliefs,” Bachmann said. “Right now, there’s a terrible intolerance afoot in the United States, and it’s against people who hold sincerely held religious beliefs.”
From Michele Bachmann, ladies and gentlemen. Barf bags can be found attached to your chair and on the walls on either side of the entrances and exits in this building.
Someone already wrote a very good post to the “bully” part of her speech, so I’m not going to cover it again here. I behoove you to read it because I think the writer did an very good job of distinguishing what “bullying” means and why the Gay (or any member of the LGBTQ) community did no such thing.
I want to talk about the other word Michele Bachmann used:
For as long as I can remember, it has been the religious people who are the most intolerant of others. As long as the rules (and if you and Palin had your ways, the laws of this country) catered to your beliefs, all was right with the world. Nowhere does your wants and desire give anyone else the constitutional right to follow whatever it is they wanted.
Now, granted, the LGBTQ community isn’t exactly a religion, but each and every one of them can be said to follow some form of belief – whether it’s in one god, multiple gods, no god, or other. Like everyone else in this country, they pay taxes, they have jobs, and they obey and operate under the same laws as other “politically-correct-straight” Americans and permanent residents. Their hard earned dollars make up your paycheck as much as your supporters’.
When the LGBTQ community gives people like you an inch, you don’t just take a mile; you force yank a hundred out of them. It is your religious beliefs that have an intolerance for others, not the other way around.
Personally, I’m sick and tired of your religious sectors telling the rest of us what to do, and actually expected us to do it. I’m a Buddhist, not a die hard Christian hypocrite like Sarah Palin. My religion preaches tolerance towards others, regardless of who they are or what their orientation may be. It is perfectly all right to disagree, but it is not all right to withhold respect just because one didn’t see eye-to-eye with another.
You preach that tolerance is a two-way street, yet you act like it is a one-way. Everyone should have tolerance for your beliefs, but that same tolerance has never been reciprocated to the other communities out there, and LGBTQ community is only one of many. Where is their constitutional right?
It is printed on the United States currency “In God We Trust” to remind the future generations that the people in this country are here because they were persecuted for their beliefs back in merry-ol’-Europe, and the forefathers did not wish to do that to anyone else regardless of what God(s) the people choose to believe in, or if they believed in one at all.
That’s my opinion as to why it didn’t say “In My God We All Must Follow.”
Thank goodness the forefathers had a good bit of sense.
So, Michele Bachmann, why don’t you start walkin’ the walk instead of just talkin’ the talk? Are you afraid of the LGBTQ community? You should be. I honestly believe they’ve got what it takes to move this country forward, do the right thing, and actually grant people true equality because they’ve walked the road of persecution for far too long.
Tolerance, indeed. Maybe we should all give you a spoonful of your own medicine to see how you like it.
Lavender Wynter, Out.
Edit @ 6:22pm – Before I get flamed for grouping all “religious people” into the same category, I’m not. I’m tired of the ones trying to shove something down my throat. I have quite a few religious friends who respect my opinion as much as I respect their choices in life. Thanks.