Wednesday, June 18, 2008

A Gesture of Goodwill for Gays

Homosexual relationships and same sex unions were accepted arrangements that predate Christianity, but this social attraction was criminalized when Christianity became the dominant religion that consequently influenced governance. It's teachings viewed this union as abnormal and a crime against nature, and contrary to the purpose of marriage - the procreation and education of children. The belief that Sodom and Gomorrah was God's wrath against this practice is a misconception, since the context of the story was centered against cruelty and lack of compassion.

Advanced societies tolerated the existence of homosexuals on the surface, but discrimination against them in whatever form was accessible, and in whatever manner was deemed to substantially eradicate them, existed. The sexual revolution that emerged in the 60's gave rise to the Gay Liberation movement of the 1970's. It advanced the idea that men and women with sexual preferences for their own gender should be recognized and freed from fear and concealment. The "closet queens" as they were referred to, desired freedom to express themselves
as productive members of society and as part of the human race; and be accepted for what nature has bestowed on them.

The Law recognizing Same Sex Marriages completes the struggle for the legalization of these unions as well as all benefits attendant to it, but continued opposition from church and conservative groups affirms the enormous social rejection of this law and the significance and impact of this matrimonial union upon dominant societal norms. However, those who maintain that homosexuality can be acquired face research findings which provide confirmation that when you're gay, you were born with it. Brain scans also show that lesbian women have brain structures as those of straight men; and gay men have brain structures the same as those of straight women. This gives rise to their gender preferences, and also confuses the male - female identity.

Now, as gay couples sign up for their matrimonial rites to finally enjoy wedded bliss, after years of being just partners; perhaps the celebrants should avoid certain norms as a gesture of goodwill. Since there would be confusion in terms of gender, regardless of brain
sizes, maybe the celebrants could refrain from playing the tune "Here Comes the Bride?" It's awfully hard to pinpoint who that could be. This will also remove the bridesmaids; and naturally, there will be no need for a "Best Man". The celebrant should also avoid the words "I now pronounce you man and wife", as this would be quite contradictory. The words " I pronounce this couple, John and Peter (or Mary and Donna) as a married couple" would be more appropriate. The "You may now kiss the bride" is also taboo and may be replaced with "You may now kiss each other".

Those making speeches during wedding receptions should also avoid using the term "gay couple" and change it with "married couple". As to who will drive the car and who will be carried to the threshold, that should be left to the couple to decide.

"Gay" used to mean happy, to inspire mirth or be filled with merriment, until it was overwhelmingly associated with homosexuality and all other aspects of it. Perhaps the meaning was the very reason why they chose the word Gay to describe themselves. With the passing of the law and the enthusiastic response to avail of its emotional and social benefits, the old meaning of gay would be strongly felt and deeply embedded in many gay couples for the rest of their lives, and for as long as their union thrives.



Kim said...

I had two male friends at art school ..
the tragedy is that they both died from aids....
a very unbiased and professional post Durano...

durano lawayan a.k.a. brad spit said...

Hello Kim,

One of my closest friends in College who was with our group and suffered as we did, finally found his calling as a gay man in 1986.

He said he didn't have a hard time opening up to his family and relatives; but was more afraid of telling us because we might consider all those years together in a different light or feel it was a betrayal.

To his surprise, we never did those things he feared. We accepted him as he was and still considered him a friend. Our group started recalling events in college with him, and not one of us remember ever being a subject of his desires, if ever. We all thought it was not until after school that he realized he was gay or accepted the fact that he was one.

He has been with a "spouse" for more than 20 years now.

I guess I have outgrown such prejudices. I just accept people as people. Thanks for the comment. :-) --Durano, done!

SheR. said...

Hey Durano. Should I tell you that my best friend's gay? His sense of style is eccentric and he is so critical of what I wear! But he is the nicest friend to have!

Homosexuals, Bisexuals, Heterosexuals make no difference to me. I shan't tell you my sexual orientation :P But as long as one finds true love. It doesn't matter just like one's skin colour.

I really can't stand name callings for this undermined group of individuals who just practise their "Free Will". Isn't that what Christian God advocates? Nevermind that. I just thought it's absolutely hyprocrite to brand them as AIDS victims, queers, homo or camp.

Well after all that's been said, I guess society is a how a group of people has a standard of measure for every code of conduct. Whatever doesn't fit means it's not part of the society or an outcaste. How sad how the world has evolved!

durano lawayan a.k.a. brad spit said...

Hi Sher,

Like you, whatever their sexual preference is or orientations are, makes no difference to me. What matters is what kind of person they are, and what they do, and how well they do what they're supposed to do.

The greatest name callers in the world I guess are the Americans, they can reduce everything to a label and a sound byte that eliminates serious discussion and debates on any issue.

Society's standards being what they are, we are still free to have our own choices. Mine is to ignore the silly standards that categorizes people into race, creed, color, and orientation. I'd take any person as a member of the human race and treat him/her as a human being would treat another. Call me an idealist or whatever, but without idealism, the world is doomed.

Long live visionaries! Hooooray! :-) --Durano, done!

Black_Mamba said...

Hey Brad. I can't say I'm gay although I was in a lesbian relationship for 3 years before I met my hubby. It was a very difficult time then as it was my first relationship and I was disowned by my family. The stares, the mean words thrown behind my back, and the guilt that came with it was like a huge curse. As the days went by, I started believing that as long as I remain true to myself and to my God, I am whole. Knowing that has made the judgement passed on to me by my family, my friends, the cuurch, and society irrelevant. Kudos to you for such an unpredjudiced view.

P.S. Thanks for the wonderful comment you left on my site. It's those kind and touching words that keep me going on such desolate and trying times. I truly appreciate it.

durano lawayan a.k.a. brad spit said...

Hi Ivy,


There is a point in everyone's life when we experiment with some things that may be considered by those around us, family included, as outrageous - to say the least. For some, it's drugs, others, relationships, and there are those who try stunts. These have something to do with our search for ourselves, and to define the kind of person we are or what we want to be.

Being in a lesbian relationship does not a lesbian make. I really think there are women and men who are more comfortable at some point, with same sex partners. But like any relationship, some don't work out.

I don't judge people Ivy. I'm sure most, if not all people have gone through that as I have - being judged as having no brains for joining the struggle against the powerful and siding with the marginalized - losing career opportunities in the process. That's what they thought and they minced no words when they told me.

I never really ventured to prove them wrong but circumstances did just that. But I went through a lot of difficult experiences too. The thing is, I always looked for the fun in whatever I did, wherever I was, and whoever I was with. That's how I live my life until today. Life's too short. I choose to enjoy it.

Thanks for dropping by. I'd be visiting your site more often as I like the sound of your words and the thoughts that go with it. :-) --Durano, done!

Tony said...

I thought I'd leave a comment from a personal evangelical perspective. On one side, my faith tells me that sex outside of a heterosexual marriage is wrong. However, that is no excuse for the lack of love shown to homosexuals by some Christians. Jesus loves all of us regardless of our sexual orientation.
My responsibility is to love people God puts in my path and introduce them to Jesus. At some point knowing Jesus means understanding that we are all sinful, we all need forgiveness, and only Jesus can provide that.
Being a heterosexual, I can't pretend to understand what it means to be gay. However, my faith says unmarried heterosexual "acts" are wrong. It also tells me that hate and prejudice are equally as wrong and that I'm just as bad as anyone else I might ever meet. I am to love and have compassion for people God puts in my life, regardless of their race, religion, politics or sexual orientation.
I cannot deny my faith and what I hold as true anymore than someone that is gay can deny who they are. Where does that leave us? Hopefully, it leaves us where we can share, talk and discuss life regardless of our differences. I know it's often my brothers and sisters in Christ that are the offenders and slamming the door shut.
Great Blog. Grace and Peace to you.

The Bobo said...

Sorry - still can't support this stuff! Anyway - while it might be legal in certain states - the fact of the matter it is still up to the other states whether or not they want to recognize a gay marriage from another state. I don't see that happening any time soon. Essentially, by marrying, they've imprisoned themselves to that one state (well..2 other states). CA and MA are the only states that will allow gay marriages. However NY has stated they will recognize it.

The Federal government still does not recognize it and therefore, the still do not reap the benefits.

And, as you stated earlier, it is not natural. You don't see two males or two females of any other species on this planet "hooking up."

durano lawayan a.k.a. brad spit said...

Hi Tony,


"I cannot deny my faith and what I hold as true anymore than someone that is gay can deny who they are. Where does that leave us? Hopefully, it leaves us where we can share, talk and discuss life regardless of our differences. I know it's often my brothers and sisters in Christ that are the offenders and slamming the door shut."

Well said Tony, I can't agree with you more. If only people would be open to discuss these things rationally. Science could help put certain aspects in perspective, but openness and understanding must also prevail and be the mode by which such discussions are held.

Thanks for your input, and for the kind words. :-) --Durano, done!

durano lawayan a.k.a. brad spit said...

Hi Bobo,

You are right about these marriages being tied to the state they obtained it from. If it is not recognized by other states, then that could bring their relationships into some complications.

I know that the huge social objection to this Law would not be simply overridden, especially the ruling being 4-3, which is very close. Protests and pressures for reversal would surely follow.

But that is how Democracy works, it's a blend of various cultures and orientations. No single group nor social division can impose all of their beliefs on the rest of the population. Even if one wins by a majority, the practice will simply continue and they will flock to those areas where they can thrive.

But I think the best is to thoroughly discuss the issues here, and the scientific findings on both sides of the coin, to really see if it is right based on religious tenets, or if it is right based on natural selection. :-) --Durano, done!

Black_Mamba said...

I thought your posts are in themselves interesting enough. Apparently the comments and your replies add another dimension. Way to go Brad.

Thanks again :)

SheR. said...

Not starting a flame war here. But saying that conducting a marriage in a place that recognises it means the marriage imprisoned or tied to that one state or country is wrong.

Quoting an example which is totally out of context from the topic (pardonez-moi Durano):
Me and my fiance wish to get married but my fiance's country will not recognise any marriage solemnise outside of this country. But to get married, we had to pay thousands to pay our way through legal or not. That is absurd.

Marriage is a union between two persons. Of course being recognised under the jurisdiction is another matter. However, what I'm trying to say here is, as long as we are married under a jurisdiction mine or his, we are legally married. So if I chose to go back to SG to get married, it doesn't mean I am tied to SG's laws only. I'm sure if I bear this marriage cert with us to UK, we are still pronounced as husband and wife.

Sorry Durano for all the ranting!

durano lawayan a.k.a. brad spit said...

Hi Ivy,

There is such a limited space for the post since making it to detailed and long will discourage readers.

It's my good fortune if a handful of readers post a comment which I can respond to, at the same time elaborate on the topic itself from a personal perspective.

Some posts I really don't expect much comments from, but even these sometimes surprises me. That's the fun in these things. Have a nice day! :-) --Durano, done!

durano lawayan a.k.a. brad spit said...

Hi Sher,

No need to be apologetic now dear friend. You're free to express your views.

I know what you're saying, but in the US, if a state doesn't recognize the marriage and the married couple decides to live in such a state, the death of one of the spouses will not provide the social benefits to the surviving spouse. His insurance, property in his name, pension, things like these. Also, if one spouse commits adultery, the aggrieved spouse cannot file for divorce and receive alimony because their marriage is not legal in the state. This is essentially what Bobo meant when he said imprisoned in those states that recognize gay marriages.

They will have to live in those 2 or 3 states that recognize such marriages. If one or both are offered jobs outside of these 3 states, then their marriage would be unbinding where they will settle.

In their mind and in their hearts they are married, but the law is the one that adjudicates societal order, and it will prevail.

That in a nutshell is the point raised by Bobo. Your point is more on the personal, emotional, and moral sense. And for as long as these factors are strong, you will actually be married wherever you are. :-) --Durano, done!

The Bobo said...

Durano, you captured my intent perfectly there! No need to add anything else on my part! Thanks.

durano lawayan a.k.a. brad spit said...

Hi Bobo,

My pleasure. I don't want to foster any more misunderstanding than there already is.:-)--Durano, done!

SheR. said...

Thanks for explaining the US law to this ignorant me Durano! :)
No hard feelings Bobo.

durano lawayan a.k.a. brad spit said...

HI Sher, No Problem. Stay married wherever you are! :-)--Durano, done!