Why Marriage Doesn't Belong to the Christianists

Palm Springs City Councilwoman Ginny Foat has a thoughtful op-ed in the Desert Sun that lays out a hard hitting case for why "marriage" does not belong to the Christianists and others who seek to make their religious beliefs superior to those of all others. Indeed, in the final analysis, "protecting marriage" has no role in the mix except for sloganeering and propaganda. Indeed, as Ms. Foat lays out, marriage has always been a contract with varying rules and varying forms over time and throughout various cultures. The "one man and one woman" form that the Christo-fascist now claim was mandated God is a relatively recent invention and portions of the Bible - in many ways a very flawed book of mythology - demonstrate that many stalwarts of God had multiple wives. Thus, the "one man and one woman" mantra of the Christianists is, like so much of the noise spewing from them, a lie. But then again, few lie as often and with as little remorse as the professional Christian set and its talking heads like Tony Perkins, Tim Wildmon, James Dobson, et al. Here are some highlights from Ginny Foat's piece that demonstrate that on marriage, the Christianists are lying again each time they claim marriage has always been between one man and one woman:
*
It is rare that I open my Sunday paper and read an opinion piece with such revulsion as I did in reading the piece authored by Jay Ambrose on Judge Walker's decision overturning Proposition 8. I guess I had just had enough!
*
To set the stage, I am sitting in my den, sipping my coffee and reading with my partner of 24 years whom I have been legally married to for two years. The dog's asleep as usual on the couch and the mundane chores of a Sunday afternoon are ahead.
*
I have yet to see a letter or opinion piece opposed to gay marriage that equates the issue with real people, your next door neighbor, your doctor, your grocery store clerk, your council member or any of the other members of the LGBT community that you interact with every day.
*
It all centers on that word “marriage” that seems to be the lightning rod for denial of equality much as it was in 1967 and the infamous case Loving v. Virginia.
*
The [Virginia] judge in that case, Judge Leon Bazile, said, “Almighty God created the races black, white, yellow, malay and red and placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangements, there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not want the races to mix.”
*
Before we start talking about gay marriage, let's look at the sorted history of marriage and its origins. Marriage did not start out as an edict from God. It is and has always been a legal agreement. It started out as a way to determine property rights and a tool to carry on bloodlines. It gets real complicated in biblical times as to the additional reasons such as the price for a bride, violation of virginity, in-laws' rights to pick the bride, how many livestock would be allocated etc. Marriage went from two families trying to maintain a bloodline and property to the 700 wives of King Solomon.
*
As history progressed, there were the various forms of marriage, including:
Polygamy, the practice of having multiple wives, (outlawed by Abraham Lincoln in 1862 yet estimates are that there are still 100,000 marriages in the U.S.).
Polyandry, the practice of having multiple husbands.
Endogamy, a requirement that you only marry within the family tribe or within your social status group.
Erogamy, which was that you marry only outside your tribe.
Common-law marriage, which allowed for recognition of cohabitation and in some cases a written agreement between the parties.
And, finally, in Las Vegas, where heterosexual couples can get married and divorced to the same person in a matter of minutes.

*

So how can anyone opine that marriage is a sacred consecration created by God of one woman and one man when that seems, in the historical sense, to be a recent occurrence?
*
This brings us to Judge Walker's learned and comprehensive decision about my life. One of the most telling findings for me in the entire decision was: “Moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians. The evidence shows conclusively that Proposition 8 enacts, without reason, a private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite-sex couples,” Walker wrote.
*
I have yet to hear of one heterosexual marriage that was diminished because California briefly allowed committed, loving people of the same sex to marry.
I am not asking for your church to sanction my marriage or for you to embrace it. All any of us living in loving, committed family relationships want is to be treated equally and fairly by our government.
*
Like so much else done by the "godly Christians" who daily demonize gay lives, be it in the form of DADT, employment discrimination or something else, the real agenda is about making LGBT individuals inferior for our failure to comply with Christianist religious views. "Protecting marriage" actually has nothing to do with it whatsoever.