Thursday, December 9, 2010

A Conservative Defends "Same Sex" Marriage and Ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

A “Conservative” for Same Sex Marriage and Ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

This writer’s opinion on this issue has been a long time coming. As a heterosexual, homosexuality is something that will always seem strangely alien to me as I am just not wired to identify with those feelings. My outlook on homosexuality has evolved over many years being something of a gay basher in high school to increasingly developing understanding and tolerance to this, the final barrier, consenting to the notion of same sex marriage.

My first revelation was that gay bashers were far crazier than anything I could ascribe to homosexuals even the ones who engage in the bizarre San Francisco kind of conduct which is probably more a reflection on San Francisco than is it sexual preference. From there I realized I had lots of friends and fellow workers who were “gay” or “lesbians.” They were just real good folks who one would never suspect – so much for don’t ask, don’t tell. How can we exclude people willing to take a bullet for their country over an issue like this?

I fully realize there are passages in The Bible which would appear to strongly condemn homosexuality. However, often in the same passage or elsewhere there are strong condemnations against adultery, promiscuity, and other lustful behavior. So if homosexuality is so awful, where’s the passion about the other things? It might be healthy if there were much more condemnation of having children out of wedlock. Let’s remember that we are also taught, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”

Let’s now add a social context. What kind of “sinful” behavior clearly has negative effects on others regardless of beliefs or morals? Conduct that results in not supporting a family or the needs of a child is surely far worse than what someone does in his or her private life or with another consulting adult.

This leads to the crux of the decision. How does same sex marriage do harm to others? How would permitting such affect this writer’s life in any manner whatsoever? Meanwhile, for the participants in a same sex relationship, the bond of marriage could be the ultimate affirmation of that which those two people hold most dearly. Why should someone else destroy their pursuit of happiness as they desire to do?

The only concern that is hard to resolve is the roll of children who have homosexual parents. Would not having two committed parents have benefits over a single parent home? The only harm is the extent to which kids might be bullied by homophobic other children. Has not our culture attempted to teach tolerance of same-sex relationships? Clearly, though a lot of values are borne from the home.

There’s only one other argument that surfaces from time-to-time, if marriage can be stretched to be inclusive of more than the traditional man and woman, where does society draw the line? Could courts then rule polygamy is okay? Could adult/child relationships be rationalized? If we employ the “do no harm” standard, those concerns should be addressed. The political process can mess up anything so ultimately then the responsibility rests in the voter. Where same sex marriage has gone to the ballot, there have been mixed results.

With all these considerations in mind, while it is far from a front burner issue in this writer’s list of political issues, both same sex marriage and eliminating restrictions against homosexuals serving in the military should be realized.

There’s a dark little secret. Some people with same sex preferences are politically conservative but might possibly ally their passions elsewhere because the conservative political factions have made them unwelcome.

Our society is full of sexual hang-ups that would be better served if all of us could discuss and debate more openly and not hide behind the barriers of outmoded morality or shrouds of political correctness.


No comments: