Sunday, April 10, 2005

Page-Ten News

Last week, the Connecticut Senate approved civil unions for homosexual couples. The House is expected to vote on it soon, and I've heard predictions in both directions. A lot of energy and publicity has been expended on this issue from both sides. If you ask me, it all seems like way too much for something that should be a page-ten story.

People's positions on civil unions vary. If asked where a person stands, he or she may give answers based on religious, social, political or financial reasons. I have tried hard to come up with an opinion on this issue, but I just do not have one. In spite of all the coverage telling me I should be for or against it...I realized I just do not care. I have heard all the arguments, and from where I sit, it does not affect me. My life will not change for the better or worse with the outcome.

The sanctity of my relationship with my wife has nothing to do with another couple's relationship, be they same sex or not. Similarly, I do not feel that my country will be committing a great social injustice if civil unions do not exist - I will not feel some great sense of indignation or lacking. Let homosexuals marry...don't let them marry...either way...I truly believe my life will remain unchanged. I see neither harm nor benefit to society or myself. Therefore, I will not endorse the cause, nor join the battle against it. I will just sit back and watch.

I do, however, reserve the right to comment.

This whole issue has been handled very badly by those in favor of civil unions and/or gay marriage. In their desire to bring their cause to fruition, homosexuals (with the all to willing help of the MSM) have actually done themselves a very large disservice. They would have been much better off if this whole issue had remained page-ten news. I firmly believe that if civil unions had stayed well off of the front page, they might very well already exist. At the core, it comes back to one of my favorite topics: ignorance over tolerance. In spite of their beliefs, homosexuals need to accept that they are greatly in the minority. As such, they must remember that not everyone agrees with them. Also, right or wrong, not everything is equal by default - and there's a better way to ask for something.

Whether or not they have an opinion, most heterosexuals I have spoken with are just plain tired of hearing and reading about this issue. I believe most heterosexuals don't care if someone is gay because they don't think about it. Why? Because thinking about it forces them to confront what "gay" means and that makes them feel uncomfortable. Now for a newsflash - that's OK. Nowhere is it written that people must be comfortable with everyone else's lifestyle. In fact, it's human nature that we won't be.

By the same token, most heterosexuals are also uncomfortable being confronted by the particulars of another heterosexual's sex life. As Americans, like it or not, we have socially inherited certain Puritanical tendencies. One is that sex is private, and not a subject for public discussion or consumption. Another is conformity - or at least the appearance of it. Today's society is certainly more open and everything from our advertising to our jokes can have sexual influences. But if you actually start to talk openly and honestly about your sex life, you'll find that you can clear a room pretty damn quick.

In short, most heterosexuals just don't want to hear about it. Hell, we don't even want to know or think about it. And since most people are heterosexuals, that means most PEOPLE don't want to know or think about it. So, I have a word of advice to the vocal minority (and I believe they are a minority) among homosexuals. It's OK to be true to yourself, but have some respect for the sensitivities of the rest of the country. Keep it discreet, don't shove it in people's faces and don't play the poor martyrs. And if you win this fight, accept it gracefully, with quiet dignity and don't rub people's noses in it. Since I don't believe civil unions are a God-given or constitutional right, but rather a social concession, a sincere "thank you" might go a long way.

To the MSM...grow up! Even if no one else is on to you, I am. You don't care any more for this cause than I do. You only want to stir the pot and sell papers or get ratings. If you really did believe in it, you wouldn't endanger it by making it a lead story. At the very least, can't you can find something else to talk about, already? Please?

1 comment:

  1. I think the issue many people have with same-sex unions is largely how they're being enacted in this country. Whatever the merits of allowing same-sex unions (and I'm in favor of allowing them), tend to be drowned out when they're enacted by judicial rulings.

    Connecticut is the first state to approve civil unions through the legislative process -- nowhere in sight are activist judges. Compared with our neighbor to the north, this has gotten very little publicity at the national level. Those are two very good things!

    Federalism works when you try it.

    ReplyDelete