Irrationality about gay marriage

In 2008, the Mormon church and the Catholic church poured time, effort, and tons of money into stopping same-sex marriage in California. Irrationally, they feared that the mere existence of same-sex marriage in the state would greatly harm them.

Now, equally irrationally, I devoutly (!) wish their fears were true.

Popular voting and same-sex marriage (Nov. '12)

I sent the following letter to the Washington Post, hoping that if it was printed, Supreme Court justices would see it (not published):

The statewide approvals of same-sex marriage are a welcome breakthrough, but civil rights should still never be subject to a popular vote.

Civil Marriage ('00)

I sent this letter to the Los Angeles Times in Feb. 2000 (not published):

Donielle Flot (Letters, Feb. 21) is misinformed about Proposition 22, the "Limitation on Marriage" initiative. There is an excellent reason why opponents do not address the heartfelt religious beliefs of many Prop. 22 supporters.

Pass or fail, the proposition will have no effect whatsoever on the religious sacrament of marriage. That remains solely in the hands of each religion. Prop. 22 speaks only to civil marriage law. No law, now or in the future, can ever force Flot and her co-religionists to marry same-sex couples against their beliefs.

Iraq War rationale ('04)

(click the cartoon to enlarge)

Mike Lukovich, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Feb. 2004

The Knight Initiative ('99)

This letter of mine was published in the Los Angeles Times Nov. 1999:

Pete Knight says he is not telling anyone how to live. I disagree. I am in a long-term (six years) relationship with another man. If Proposition 22 passes, I cannot even dream of getting married.

My partner is a Mexican citizen, living in Mexico, without significant savings in the bank, and certainly without a wife and children. Because of this, due to our xenophobic laws, he cannot even get a tourist visa to visit me in L.A., much less live with me. So we cannot even be domestic partners.

I do not understand Pete Knight's claim that my marriage would somehow harm his.

- - - - - -

The Times chose not to print my next-to-last sentence:

Because of attitudes like Pete Knight's, I sleep alone 50 weeks of the year.

The "yuck factor" ('97)

This letter of mine was published in the Honolulu Advertiser in June 1997:

In his June 1 commentary on same-sex marriage, Chuck Sh-veev gives an incisive analysis of respect and acceptance and their foe, the 'yuck factor':

"Straights generally cannot bear the thought of
a similarity between their own expressions of
intimacy -- and those of gays ... (which straights
regard) with primitive visceral repugnance....
Whatever its origin, however it gets sustained,
this yuck factor is not going away."

I agree that this is at the heart of the matter, but I disagree that it is inevitable. It must be recognized and fought as a "social disease," something spread from one person to another.

No legislation can affect it, but there is one remedy, as every openly gay person can attest: coming out. Working one-on-one, just as the yuck factor itself, coming out can replace yuck with respect and acceptance.

Voters approve Prop. 8 ('08)

I sent this letter to the LATimes in November 2008 (not published):

The older I get, the more I despise religion.

Why I'm not married ('08)

This letter of mine was published in the LATimes in Feb. 2008:

[My best letter (so far) on marriage]

I've been in a very long-distance monogamous relationship with a Mexican citizen for almost 15 years. In the 90s, we applied three times for a tourist visa for my partner to just visit me here in Los Angeles. The application was refused each time.

We gave up. I visit Mexico, and together, we've gone to Costa Rica and to Canada.

"Why not just get married?" you ask. That would be nice, but we're gay.

Civil Marriage ('04)

I sent this letter to the LATimes in Feb. 2004 (not published):

Doesn't anyone at the White House understand the
difference between civil and religious marriage?

Sanctity of Marriage ('03)

I sent this letter to the LATimes in Nov. 2003 (not published)

Bush says he wants to "defend the sanctity of marriage." By definition, sanctity is a topic for churches. No court, no law, no constitutional amendment can force a church to sanctify a marriage if it doesn't want to. The sanctity of marriage does not need defense and cannot be affected by governments.

Besides, I'm still waiting for someone to explain how a gay marriage could possibly harm anyone else's marriage!