bad gay

★

“Marriage is one of the basic building blocks of our neighborhoods and our nation. At its best, it is a stable bond between two individuals who work to create a loving household and a social and economic partnership. We encourage couples to marry because the commitments they make to one another provide benefits not only to themselves but also to their families and communities. Marriage requires thinking beyond one’s own needs. It transforms two individuals into a union based on shared aspirations, and in doing so establishes a formal investment in the well-being of society. The fact that individuals who happen to be gay want to share in this vital social institution is evidence that conservative ideals enjoy widespread acceptance. Conservatives should celebrate this, rather than lament it.”

—

Ted Olson, making the conservative case for gay marriage. (via newsweek)

While I am unquestionably in favor of equality for those who wish to get married, this is disconcerting. It has already been observed by writer and queer activist Kate Bornstein that the movements pushing for marriage equality do not represent the broader LGBT community, and that true marriage equality will not come until married and non-married people have the same rights. Olson has no interest in equality for those who don’t conform to his standards of what relationships should be. His case for gay marriage is not one based at all on accepting differences, but rather on social conformity. He wants gay marriage not because people should be free to choose, but because he believes that it will further homogenize people. The implicit point here is that marriage is the focal point of the community, the only source of social solidarity. This premise precludes other new forms of social relations in the name of a tradition that doesn’t, and never will, suit everyone’s needs.

Marx said “The bourgeoisie… has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation.” (The Communist Manifesto). Olson is explicitly saying that marriage and the family are (at least partially) economic institutions, subject to the forces that operate around and through the market. Given the dynamics of our society, this isn’t untrue (money is the cause for a large percentage of divorces), but it seems that Olson is projecting this historical circumstance into a universal fact. Beyond this, he implies that this economic relation is both ethical and beneficial to society, which callously ignores the disastrous effects on children in families destroyed by financial circumstances.

(via newleft)

(via fyeahsocialism)

(via fyeahsocialism & newsweek)Tags: gay marriage

★

“In an attempt to return balance to the force, I will be voting for Republican Scott Brown in Massachusetts Senate election, tomorrow.”

—

Icarus

Brown supports gay marriage in Massachusetts as “established law,” which is not to be overturned. Additionally, he is in favor of civil unions, opposed to a federal marriage amendment and fundamentally holds the same Federalist approach to marriage that President Obama does. It is unfortunate that the gay left is forever ready and willing to do the DNC’s bidding. They would have us believe that the future of gay rights hangs on a Democrat winning this special election.

(via hotgaynerds)