We All Do It

Did you notice the Associated Press story today that reminded us what week this is? It's the “Freedom to Marry Week.” Heck, it's Thursday and it took them most of the week to remind us? It's even the 12th annual. Huh, who knew? I've never even heard of it before. Have you? Who declares what week it is anyway; the same people who make you pay them to name a star after you?

The article touched on California's Proposition 8 and mentioned that the state's Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on March 5, 2009. Here's another instance of those who disagree with the voters trying to get the wrong branch of government to change the law in their favor. This time the argument can't be that it's against the state constitution since the voters made it part of the constitution. And at least for once someone printed an article that didn't mention the standard line about “narrow-minded hateful bigots who want to discriminate by taking away others’ rights”.

The end of the article points to a national grass-roots organization called Marriage Equality USA. Equality is always a good word to use for your organization since it implies that those who disagree with you don't believe in equality. For that matter, freedom is also one of those words, as in Freedom to Marry Week. But “free for all” is not equivalent to a free-for-all. That's why civilized societies always have restrictions in their laws. We have the right to “free” speech in this country, but we still put restrictions on it: slander, libel, perjury, conspiracy, etc.

Therefore it stands to reason that a civilized society would have restrictions on marriage. The article quotes a Matt Flanders, 37, of Brooklyn as saying, “I should be able to marry the person I love.” So is he, or those who favor his views, calling for marriage to include polygamy? Those who engage in it state that they do love all those other people. What if someone in his 50's asserts he is in love with a 10 year old? Would Flanders et al. fight for the right of a “dirty old man” to marry an innocent child? Can anyone remember hearing a gay rights activist call for incestuous marriages? And this whole line of reasoning by this side of the debate begs the question, “Why stop at 'person' I love?” Why do you want to restrict marriage to just 'people'? Come on, let's be equal here!

It’s easy to vilify those who believe differently than we do and say they are against equality, freedom or that they're un-American. But the fact of the matter is that people on both sides of this issue believe in restrictions on marriage, which have nothing to do with hatred, bigotry, discrimination or taking away rights. What it does have to do with is where each feels those restrictions should be. You see when it comes to restrictions on marriage, we all do it.