Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Kilroy Café #2: "BAN GAY MARRIAGE (heterosexual marriage, too!)"

Here is a repost of a 2008 Kilroy Café philosophy essay. You can click on the image above for a larger version or print it out on a single page via the pdf file. The full text is also below. Also see other Kilroy Café newsletters and the KilroyCafe Twitter Feed. This newsletter can be displayed on blogs and websites under the terms given here.


BAN GAY MARRIAGE!
(heterosexual marriage, too!)

By GLENN CAMPBELL

It is a polarizing political question: Should committed gay and lesbian couples be allowed to legally marry? Should the institution be restricted to "one man and one woman," or can it also be "one man and one man"? For that matter, what about "one man and two women" or "one man, one monkey, three sheep and a donkey"? Where are we going to draw the line?

In my opinion, everyone has the question upside down. Instead of lobbying the legislature or sponsoring voter initiatives to promote one side or the other, we should be talking to each gay couple directly. We should be sitting them down, perhaps in a Christian setting, and counseling them on the facts of life.

Why would you want to screw up a perfectly good relationship?

Research shows that most divorces are caused by marriage. Furthermore, science can also prove that gay marriage will inevitably lead to gay divorce, just as nasty as the hetero kind.

Marriage, in fact, is downright dangerous. It's like handing out guns to teenagers. Who among us, when afflicted by love, has the mental capacity to comprehend "Til death do you part"? Who among us is truly competent to say, "I have thought through all the implications, and this is the only path I will ever want for the rest of my life?"

Gay couples don't know how good they got it. They can never make the Big Step. They can never go down to the Chapel of Love one drunken night and throw away all future discretion. They can never just close their eyes and jump.

They have to think things through. Due to the protective restrictions in current law, they can only take their relationship one step at a time, in a process resembling reason. They must explicitly choose to share property, death benefits and child custody on a thoughtful, case-by-case basis, not as a single blind package. Yes, there are still a few retirement benefits that gay couples can't share, but most marriage services are available á la carte to anyone with some creativity.

Pity the poor heterosexual couple, living together in sin. To them, marriage is always the elephant in the room, the dark cloud hanging over their heads. When the relationship isn't perfect and you wonder what's wrong, it is easy to think that a lifetime contract must be the missing piece.

You can ask a divorcee: When did the relationship start to fall apart? A common reply is: "On the day we got married." Most relationships don't need and can't support the whole marital package. The most dangerous part is that individuality and self-responsibility often get suppressed, setting the stage for an explosion later on.

If you truly love someone and want to be with them, then why do you need the contract? If you are drawn together, so be it; if you grow apart, then you split up. Isn't the government contract, and all the economic and social baggage it carries, getting in the way of your free expression? If you're unmarried and you stay together, you know it's love. If you're encumbered and you stay together, you can never be sure.

If your particular insanity is to lust after the opposite sex, then government should tolerate your personal preference, but it doesn't need to sanction it. Marriage is, in essence, a form of religious expression that government ought to stay jolly well clear of.

Who is behind the marriage conspiracy? It's the Big Corporations, of course! They have fed us this delusion for years, because they know it is easier to sell useless products to trapped married people.

Only the gays are still free.
—G .C.


©2010, Glenn Campbell, Glenn-Campbell.com.
See my other philosophy newsletters at www.KilroyCafe.com.
Released from Las Vegas (March 28, 2008).
You can distribute this newsletter on your own blog or website under the conditions given at the main page for it.
You are welcome to comment on this newsletter below.

3 comments:

  1. Hi there Glenn,

    My name's Danny, and I have been a fan of yours for some time (you added me as a Facebook contact some time ago but I ended up removing my Facebook profile because I don't particularly trust the site).

    I wondered if you'd mind me putting this essay and your 'The Case Against Marriage' up on my blog (http://ahistoryofsexuality.blogspot.com/ ) - properly attributed to you with links to where I got the text?

    I really admire your work on love and relationships and I have found that my opinions, while not exactly the same as yours, do bear some similarity. I direct my readers (the few I have so far) to the sites I borrow content from, but I'd really hate for something to happen to your sites and have your insightful and very readable musings disappear.

    I must confess I put the first few chapters of 'The Case Against Marriage' and this shorter essay up on my blog without thinking to ask your permission first. If you aren't happy for me to reproduce your work on my blog I will of course take them down, otherwise, I hope you don't mind me continuing to put 'The Case Against Marriage' up chapter by chapter? Properly attributed with links to sources, of course.

    Thanks for your time, and for all the work you put into your writing too, it's given me a lot to think about!

    Danny.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks! You can used the image files only under the terms given here: http://www.kilroycafe.com/cgi/freeuse.cgi?src=/ideas/marriage/

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great, thanks Glenn, I've replaced the copied text of this essay with the .gif file, nice and easy.

    I looked for a similar link system for 'The Case Against Marriage' but of course there isn't one, because it's just text, I guess (I'm no computer whizz). Would you like me to take the three chapters I reproduced down?

    Once again, many thanks,

    Danny.

    ReplyDelete