In a spectacular display of Not Getting It, some of the Republicans in the Live Free Or Die State are getting cocky about having a supermajority in the NH House and Senate again…and they’re trying to use it to roll back the gay marriage law. Of all the issues on the table, they make gay cooties a priority once again.
In past elections, I’ve voted for a few Republicans for local office–whenever there wasn’t a Libertarian running, or whenever the Democrat on the ballot was more of a douche than the Republican. Should the NH Republicans be successful in getting our gay marriage law repealed, I will never again vote for another Republican in this state. I’m sick and tired of the debate. We shouldn’t have it in a state that has LIVE FREE OR DIE as its motto. We shouldn’t have it because the straight majority shouldn’t be able to vote itself special rights they can deny to gays, or blacks, or Jews, or Christians, or left-handed people. We shouldn’t have that debate anymore for much the same reason why we shouldn’t have a debate about reintroducing miscegenation laws. This particular culture war is pretty much over. There are just too many people nowadays, both liberal and conservative, who recognize that the state should have precisely fuck-all to do with licensing, condoning, or promoting marriage between two consenting adults.
Now, I realize that I’m once again poking the hornet’s nest with a stick by talking about homosexuality, and inviting certain commenters to leave their feces-obsessed ramblings all over this here Interblog. I do, however, want to put a theory out there:
Most opposition to, disgust with, and fear of homosexuality in this country is simply male discomfort at the thought of male homosexuality. The arguments against homosexuality and gay marriage come wrapped in convenient religious or pseudo-biological arguments, but to me, it looks like it’s simply a moral cloak wrapped around the fact that a lot of straight American males are grossed out at the idea of two men having sex. (Note the relative popularity of lesbian vs. gay porn among straight males—ask a college frat brother what he thinks of two hot chicks getting it on, and he’s much more likely to give that a thumbs-up than the idea of two hot guys getting it on.)
On a side note—I throw up a little in my mouth whenever I hear someone referring to the Defense of Marriage act. Talk about a positively Newspeak name for a piece of legislature. How do you defend something by making sure there’s less of it? How does it “defend” my marriage when my home state doesn’t let a gay couple get the same legal benefits my wife and I enjoy? And do come back to me when the straight marriages in this country don’t have a 50% divorce rate. If social conservatives wanted to defend the institution of marriage, they should start with the straight folks first. But I’m utterly convinced that most of the anti-gay marriage hullabaloo is just personal disgust and discomfort packaged in convenient selective bits of Scripture.
(And lest anyone accuse me of “being hostile toward religion” again…I have an awful lot of friends who are a.) Christian, b.) good people, and c.) in favor of equal marriage rights. Keeping marriage and government apart isn’t exactly a new-fangled radical idea. Render unto Caesar, and all that.)