okay, fine, I give up


You know, I’ve tried really hard to stay out of the whole fracas to do with gay marriage. First, because I try so very hard to not be political on this blog. Second, because everybody and their freaking brother in blogland is talking about it. Who wants to read more about it?

(Is it just me, or are the overwhelming majority of bloggers liberals? Maybe it’s just the bloggers I read, and who they link to, and who they link to, and so on.)

However, I’m sick-and-tired of hearing the argument from the hardcore right that if gay marriage is allowed, what next? I’ve heard polygamy, pedophilia, necrophilia and bestiality mentioned as all viable concerns for why gay marriage should not be allowed. And yes, I’ve heard this in more than one place. I even heard it discussed on Larry King between the mayor of SF and some right-wingers.

Putting my revulsion at the gross stupidity of these arguments aside for a moment to devolve into utter ridiculousness…

Why should we stop there? I mean, I know a hell of a lot of ladies who might consider marrying a RealDoll or their favourite vibe.

Certainly these substitute lovers can give reliable orgasms – which is not always the case in our human lovers!

Or let’s look at even stranger things. Why shouldn’t we be allowed to marry our home appliances? Say, the dishwasher. Can you think of a life partner who’d so willingly do dishes any time we ask? Or cars. Hey, people love and name their cars already. Why not marriage?

Honestly, people’s stupidity never ceases to amaze me.

A lot of my distaste with this is I’m a child of the AIDS generation. I remember when “the reason gays were bad” was because they “slept around and had promiscuous lifestyles”. Now they want to settle down, and they’re still bad. Apparently the arguments will always change depending on what best suits the arguers.

Okay, rant over.

About the author

Vikki McKay


  • My favorite is from this old Rolling Stone article:
    “Cameron, 59, a former psychologist based in Colorado Springs, issues a stream of data often used by anti-gay activists: that gays are far more likely than straights to molest children, that gays are more likely to commit crimes as mundane as tax evasion or shoplifting, and so on.

  • I think most anti-gay sentiments are born out of ignorance. I’m privy to the happenings of two gay relationships within my small circle of contacts. One couple consistently break up and gets back together every month and will no doubt be spending vast amounts of their incomes on divorce lawyers one day if allowed and to marry. The other couple are in one of the best relationships I have ever seen and have no interest in marrying.
    If you consider marriage to be a legal union, there are almost no arguments against allowing gays to marry that hold water. Yet nearly every day we see a strong group of ignorant traditionalists who stand strong in their beliefs that they can tell others who they can not marry.
    It’s eerily reminiscent of the racism against blacks so many decades ago when they were refused entry into common schools and common washroom facilities.
    We’re still a long ways away from equal rights for all.
    The problem really boils down to a combination of religion and stupidity I think, which doesn’t really surprise me because I use those two terms together quite often and both have caused most of the problems we’ve ever had anyway.

  • I am not necessarily in favor of gay marriage, but then I also try to get some perspective when things throw mw off-kilter. The open letter to the governor of Massachusetts by Gary Luepp is a good read and makes some interesting “non-politically charged” points.
    The article is here:

  • I find the notion that marriage of any kind will *lead* to sex of any kind to be grossly misinformed.

  • Referring to the comment, “polygamy, pedophilia, necrophilia and bestiality mentioned as all viable concerns and bestiality mentioned as all viable concerns for why gay marriage should not be allowed”, i’ve know some “hard core” southern baptist and down home southern rednecks that would fall into the mentioned catagories of extreme behaviors and practice such acts religously….does that imply that people in glass houses shouldn’t throw rocks?

  • seriously, though… I think that the controversy has more to do with political power than with the issue of sex. At one point in time, Christians held enough political sway that their beliefs were the social norm. Letting go of that is difficult, and it’s not surprising that a fight is being put up.
    As a Christian, what I find disturbing is the notion of imposing our rules on the general populace through law. Yes, there are areas where our rules would coincide with those of the populace (murder, stealing, etc.), but you don’t see laws on gluttony, etc.
    Now, the notion that homosexuality is a sin is something that I’m going to have to ask God to explain to me someday, but in the meantime, if the church has rules about its sacraments, that’s fine. But to impose those rules outside of the context of the church just doesn’t make any logical sense to me.
    If two people want to seal their commitment to each other with a social status that brings some recognition of that commitment, including (beyond the social recognition) the ability to file taxes, share healthcare benefits, etc., etc., etc. then what is the problem with that? I just don’t see the big threat.
    The “threat” then would appear to be that we’re not in control anymore. But, personally, the notion of coveting political power is decidedly un-Christian.

  • Quoting from previous comment about: Cameron, ex-psychologist of Colorado…So powerful is the allure of gays, Cameron believes, that if society approves that gay people, more and more heterosexuals will be inexorably drawn into homosexuality, The evidence is that men do a better job on men and women on women, if all you are looking for is orgasm.

  • First of all, I completely reject the inane premise that lovers of the same sex make better lovers. That

  • I don’t see what the hullabaloo is about. I’ve heard it said that if gays are allowed to marry it will “cheapen” conventional marriages.
    Oh puh-leeeeeze. I don’t care about the gender of couples, I just think that in this world where hate is so prevalent, it’s amazing that two people find eachother and commit to eachother.
    Why stand in the way of that? I don’t think that it should be an issue…. it’s just ridiculous!

  • AverageJoe: In your “3 groups” distinction, I think that the Libertarians who don’t have marketable skills tend to vote Republican, where as those who make enough money that taxes are a reasonable tradeoff to get rid of the social constraints vote Democrat. I think most of my readers would self-describe as Libertarians, but I’ve gotten zero pushback on my Dubya bashing, and that’s the only explanation I can figure out.
    Overall, as much as I’m against marriage as a social institution, I’m quite happy for my friends who are deriving joy (and discovering new hiccups in their relationships…) from their opportunity to get married here in SF.

Follow Me