Thursday, May 10, 2012

Even If Your Religion Says It's Right, It's Not


Sometimes I just want to smack someone up alongside their head when they say things like two people shouldn’t get married because religion says so.  Of course, that impulse is not keeping with do no harm right?  It’d be giving in to violent urges that really won’t help me make my case even if it would feel so good sometimes.  If you haven’t heard, North Carolina became the latest state to enact a law banning same sex humans from getting married because after all, that is something a law should decide right?  We should have a law that eliminates the hope of humans to pursue their happiness.  We should have a law that places one group higher and more worthy of privilege than another group right?  If someone says their religion defines marriage as one man and one woman than the opposition just needs to shut up and back off.  Invoking religion as an excuse to limit someone else’s pursuit of happiness is exactly what we should do.
Except we shouldn’t.
Ever.
A friend of mine pointed out that the last time North Carolina amended their state constitution was to ban interracial marriage.  Apparently they learned nothing from that experience.  They have forgotten the lessons taught about races and how that minuscule difference on our DNA that makes us one race and not another has absolutely no effect on intelligence or ability or competence.  It’s so tiny that in discussing the differences between humans it is largely irrelevant when considering humans as a species.  Consequently, we finally got it through some people’s thick noggins that skin color is really a stupid reason to keep people from pursuing their happiness with another person or from fulfilling their fullest potential.  When considering the biology of humans, I am willing to wager that differences between a homosexual human and a heterosexual human are even less noticeable.  Is this really the best Americans can do as humans—say I’m better than you because my religion says I am?  Preposterous!
I have no problem with people who aren’t comfortable around homosexuals.  I have no problem with people who believe in a religion.  I do have a lot of friends who fall into one or both categories.  They are entitled to their own right to privacy and religion yada yada yada.  However, when it comes to establishing laws based on religious doctrine that restrict the basic human rights of others such as the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness I get pissed.  Those human rights include equality before the law.  Therefore, if your church doesn’t want to perform a marriage for a homosexual couple, fine.  They don’t have to.  However when it comes to living in a secular society as we do, we should never vote on a basic human right like freedom of liberty to marry whoever the hell you want.  Period!
Now I heard an interesting counter to this idea of marriage as a human right.  Someone suggested that  marriage may not really be a human right.  Could it be a man made institution instead?  I actually shook my head in an attempt to understand exactly what this point was.  Somehow shaking my head vigorously would rattle my marbles into alignment to understand this notion.  Where is this distinction?  Huh?  Human rights are those items that humans agree upon as basic entitlements to everyone because they are human beings.  Marriage is not an expression of freedom of pursuing life and liberty and happiness and expression and thought?  WHAT?  Everything around us in society is a man made construct for cryin’ out loud and that includes human rights since humans are involved.  Le Duh!  After the horrors of World War II the world agreed that human beings needed to band together to protect the lives of all people who are oppressed because of gender, religion, race, and sexuality.  Do we need a homosexual holocaust to make it plain to everyone or can we agree that isn’t necessary?  There are simply some violations that humanity cannot allow to persist especially under the guise of religious freedom.  Religion is after all, a man made construct too.  I honestly do not see how one can be divorced from the other and used as a defense for legislated bigotry.  Freedom of speech protects even the most horrible statements.  People are free to practice whatever religion they want.  However when those beliefs are used to target a specific group and limit their rights to equality under the law, humans need to speak up and call bullshit. 
Religion can be beautiful.  Religions can provide a sound basis for living a good and a just life.  However when religion is used to justify oppression then it becomes a bastardization of its core belief.  When it comes to writing laws for America, religion should not enter into the discussion.  Boiling the religion out of the rules and focusing on the core ethics of the belief system reveals something remarkable; something that I have believed for years as I have been studying and pondering religions and spirituality.  All major world religions believe in some form of the Golden Rule.  Do unto others as you would have done to you.  If the tables were turned, would heterosexuals be ok being told they can’t marry?  Would they quietly accept “civil union” as an appropriate compromise?  They shouldn’t even have to consider it because we are all humans with the right to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  If two women want to get married how does that harm anyone?  If two men want to say, “I do” before a crowd of their loved ones who is harmed?  No one!  You don’t have to like it.  Your religion doesn’t have to perform it.  But your laws damned well better protect their right to marry because it’s the only just course of action.  

No comments:

Post a Comment