The following was originally posted on Unsinn Image’s Instant Chaos blog on Tumblr and is reprinted with his permission. I very, very, very rarely post other people’s writing on my blog; in fact, this may be a first. But it’s an important subject, and one I felt he summed up much better than I could have. Please check out the rest of his blog!
* * * * *
This image was created for my social justice passion project “Nakedly Obvious.” The model is the incomparable Playboy model Stephy C.
The Supreme Court is currently hearing arguments for and against gay marriage.
One of the Court’s considerations is whether we should upset a heterosexual tradition of marriage which has persisted for thousands of years.
But, how has that tradition been perpetuated? Through religion.
Religion…which has no place in a secular debate about civil rights.
Remove the illogical, archaic, religious doctrine from the debate and there is absolutely no justification to deny adults of sound mind the right to be legally bound by their love.
Define a group in any other way, then try and make the argument they shouldn’t marry. You would sound ridiculous.
BANK TELLERS shouldn’t be allowed to marry.
FARMERS shouldn’t be allowed to marry.
LEFT-HANDED PEOPLE shouldn’t be allowed to marry.
CHRISTIANS shouldn’t be allowed to marry.
Would anyone in their right mind go all the way to the Supreme Court to defend the position that Christians shouldn’t be allowed to marry? You’d be laughed out the front door. And that is exactly what should happen to those who oppose gay marriage.
This question is, and has always been, a matter of equal protection and civil rights. And when history reflects on this era in our social evolution — as it has over past judicial missteps involving segregation and slavery — it will judge us most harshly if we fail to insure equal protection and civil rights to all of our citizens.
And rightfully so.
Two people in love committing to each other is not harmful to marriage. That is what marriage IS…or at least, what it should be. Defending the right of one person to marry and denying the same right to a similarly-situated person is unlawful discrimination. Period. And if the Justices can keep clear eyes and heads and not be blinded by religious fervor, defending the rights of EVERYONE to marry who they love will be an inevitable outcome.
A New York Times article on the deliberations can be read here.
Mythic Pictures 