I'm inclined to agree with abgemacht...I mean, if the state doesn't recognize gay marriage, then logically there cannot BE gay marriage, either performed or recognized, as it would either not recognize old marriages (or actually I think there was a provision for that, a grandfather clause if you will, but still) and cannot have new marriages if the procedure/idea is not recognized as constitutional.legal.
I actually have a question for any defenders of Pro 8, not a confrontational question, I just want to know because frankly *I* am confused over this point:
First, where in the Bible are the passages that denounce this, I'm sure there likely are some that can be read to that effect, this movement is too large for there not to be; whether those passages are corrupted or their interpretations are up for debate, but that's exactly what I'd like--where does the basis of your argument come from, ie, where in your religious text (assuming you oppose gay marriage on a Judeo-Christian/religious basis, if not...then what basis do you have, why are you against it?)
And secondly, I hear plenty from the Anti-8 side about how this will "destroy the sanctity of marriage" or "go against our core values."
What makes marriage sacred beyond love, does the man/woman rule supercede the love aspect, ie, two not-in-love people, a man and a woman, can get married, but two homosexuual people cannot? Even God's decrees are generally ranked to some degree in terms of importance, ie, the Ten Commandments being generally more important than the "don't eat pork" rule.
So I ask--is the sanctity of marriage MORE about the love, or the joining of men and women, and if it's the latter, why that over love?
I also feel I should clarify something about where I'm coming from--I do NOT, myself, believe in the concept of love on the whole. I'm sure it exists, but I believe that it is so INCREDIBLY RARE that perhaps out of the millions of marriages in the USA alone, I'd wager off the top of my head 999/1000 of those marriages are not truly what I'd consider love. Love is when two people not only care deeply for each other, but they also complement each other, fitting like a glove while pushing mightliy like a hand; I am of the firm opinion, both in theory and from experience watching plenty of sentimental friends love and stay and even get engaged or love and break up, that the only true soulmate is that which is your mirror and opposite; to pull out the philosophy (because what's an obiwanobiwan response without that?) I am staunchly opposed to Plato's idea of "likes with likes" in terms of marriages, against the idea "whoever makes you happy" and instead support the Aristotilean and Nietzschean ideas of strength from adversity, the way Aristotle in "Politics" teaches that a strong society isn't made up of likes with likes, like Plato taught, but rather opposing kinds of people shoring up each others weaknesses, or, to use Nietzsche's brilliant concept from "Thus Spoke Zarathustra," that your friend/lover should be both a fierce friend and enemy, a sort of cracked mirror, wherein you can see yourself and relate, but also someone that you'll oppose and bring you further towards your greater potential in life, as, like Aristotlte, he believes that people together as opposites shore up each other's weaknesses, and make the strengths all the better, so respect is huge for Nietzsche.
That opposition of forces and people, however, does NOT apply to the sexes.
I've never been in love, and frankly I see the entire practice as, on the whole, inferior to fierce friendship...I've only known really two couples in all the many I've met that actually truly seem fierce and strong and, what do you know, they're opposites--and each time one had a problem the other leapt to the first person's aid, and they ARE stronger together...but yes, in general I look down on the idea of love and those who claim to be "so in love." How many I've ehard claim that, and justa week later...or those that stay married but that's out of FEAR, not LOVE, the chains of potential harm and economic harm.
I'm about as asexual a person as you'll ever meet. ;)
But I'll defend those who ARE in love, TRULY in love, and their right to the equal pursuit of what true love means, the betterment of both parties, any day.
ANYONE has that right, the right to improve themselves though true union, and it's so rare, it's a crime against the human spirit and being to deny those cases where there IS that rare diamond of true love...just because the two are gay or lesbian.
Well, I've done philosophy, so I guess I'd best close with Shakespeare and ask...
Hath not a Gay hands?