Quote:
Quote by: Frank_Wolcott  I have a proposition to make. Homosexual marriage is considered a highly controversial topic (or so it seems.) The issue is that of marriage rights recognized by the state or government. Are these considered the rights of the individual as well as a group of persons? And if so, could this issue have a precedent of equal nature with which we could judge the benefits or detriments of? I speak of the civil rights of issues of the 1950s. At that time, the rapid integration of an ethnic group into a society with which they were previously not identified with caused great political and social upheavel. I believe that homosexual marriage also ascribes to this same line of thought. I believe that we must judge what the worst outcome could be (via said precedent) in order to determine the viability of a movements such as this. I recognize that each contrasts differnces that would not make this an entirely plausible idea. However, this is a social/political movement that involves a certain minority group. This also involves such a minority group deriving government benefits from such an action. It is also based upon the individuals ethical stance (or so it would seem).
For the record, I have no moral or political objection to homosexual marriage.
I would greatly appreciate someones thoughts upon my philosophy. Thank you for your future input. |
The negative connotation does not exist for as large of a majority as it did in the issue of blacks in the fifties and sixties. Keeping this in mind, while I do think it might cause upheaval, it would not be anywhere near significant as the upheaval during Martin Luther King Jr's march for rights.
Also, keep in mind the prejudice towards homosexuals is much too subtle and much less barbaric than the one towards blacks were. I am sure if homosexual marraige were to be legalized, there would not be, for example, the lighting on fire of homosexual bars while the police do nothing(like there definately was for black communities and churches in the 50's and 60's). All truly significant actions by the opposition would probably occur on the political and legal level, by my opinion.
At least, I hope so. I hope we have moved beyond the barbaric prejudicial response of the 50's and 60's. I, at least, don't see it.