The Bleacherman has entered the stadium…
It seems that half of this nation seeks a smaller, less obtrusive government yet they want this small, unobtrusive government to come into our bedrooms and to legislate morality.
In a referendum in November, 2008, the voters of the State of California approved an initiative that banned gay marriage. Less than two years later, U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker ruled that Proposition 8 violated the federal constitutional rights of gays and lesbians to marry the partners of their choice.
His ruling is expected to be appealed to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and then up to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Needless to say, the political right, the political far right and the moral right are angry and upset over this ruling. Again they complain and chant about activist judges overturning the will of the people.
An example of their anger is reflected in remarks offered by Austin R. Nimocks, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund. He said, “We’re obviously disappointed that the judge did not uphold the will of over 7 million Californians who made a decision in a free and fair democratic process.”
Now hold on their Austin. Yes, the voters in the state of California did approve the ballot initiative banning same sex marriage. But your number 7 million is wrong and distorts the argument and manipulates the facts. The final vote results on the issue of gay marriage (Proposition 8) reflect that 5.3 million voters approved the measure while 4.8 voted against the ban. The difference was 500,000 votes or just 5% of the total votes cast.
The fact, the truth, the reality is that the measure did not pass overwhelmingly.
So I am not so sure I understand what is the argument and why are we arguing about our right to live the way we want to live.
The self appointed, self anointed moral police (no, I am not talking about the moral police as is found in many Muslim countries) believe that marriage is and always has been and always should be a union between a man and a woman.
Backers of the gay marriage ban believe that such union sets bad examples for children and they believe that children fare best with both a mother and father. They backers also claim that the very institution of marriage is threatened and compromised by the right to enter into a gay marriage.
I strongly emphasize that I appreciate and honor and respect these beliefs.
But I disagree. Strongly!
I believe and statistics I am sure support the fact that more marriages are destroyed by infidelity then by gay marriages. Look around. Estimates now put the divorce rate at over 40 percent. I highly doubt that gay marriage is the primary, precipitating and contributing factor in a large number of these divorces. So if you want to use the threat to marriage argument to oppose gay marriage; you need to amend your argument to include a prohibition on divorce and infidelity.
Statistics also show that there is no quantitative difference on how children fare between traditional and gay marriages. It is assumed that you can be like Sarah Palin and make up facts but the truth is the truth.
And don’t bring God into the argument. If your argument is that God tells you that homosexuality is wrong, that same God also says things like EXODUS 20:14 “Thou shalt not commit adultery” and DEUTERONOMY 5:18 “Neither shalt thou commit adultery”
I will only accept your God argument against gay marriage when you also argue and legislate against adultery. Only then will your argument have merit and validity.
To the BLEACHERMAN, this whole thing is about freedom and liberty. How does a libertarian object to a government telling a businessman who he can do business with and then go out and argue that government can tell people who to date and who to marry? I believe marriage should be defined as a union between a man and a woman. I also believe that gays have a right to enter into a union (use any word you want to) and insure for themselves the right to the same freedoms, protection and benefits enjoyed in a traditional marriage.
The Bleacherman has left the stadium…
Bleacherman's Blog 
In Sweden practically every women is in the working life. Swedish have liberal attitudes to homosexuality, one of the most liberal in the world.
Many believe it was the hormonal contraception which was the main reason for the sexual revolution (and later to the Stonewall riots) but the real reason was that the women left their role as housewives and entered to the working life. Women became more economically independent and there was not so big need to defend the nuclear family. Today religious conservatives oppose both heterosexual liberalism and GLBT liberation, but the religious conservatives are often families where the woman is at home, not working, and the husband earns the living for the family. It’s more typical for the women with work career to have liberal attitudes. Maybe it is not religious conservatism which make a woman to stay at home, but the real causality is opposite, she’s not working and not economically independent, so she have to be a religious conservative. The Baptists claim that the numbers of divorce in their church are very low, only 1/39000 of marriages end to divorce among the true members of their church. (Some researchers doubt strongly these numbers http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm.)
Thank you for your input. I agree with your perspective. Sweden reflects a very progressive, open and intelligent environment and yes, the enpowerment of women in society in general (in workplace in specific) has helped society form a more liberal attitude towards many social issues.
In America we have people who love the fly the flag of libertarianism and seek a government that does not intefere with the mechanics of daily life. But they want to be the sole source of defining what social life should be. Many Baptists believe that a woman’s place is to be at home; especially the kitchen and the bedrrom. And there are many woman who accept this subjugation. And I have to prespect their beliefs and attitudes. But they must accept my beliefs and attitudes as well.
America is crumbling under the weight of its own turn towards discrimination. It is crumbling because while everyone wants to support constitutional fundamentalism they go off and seek ways to circumvent its essence and purity.
Thank you again and stay safe and be well.