I’ve noticed that you refer to equality quite often in yourdiscussions. Often referring to the Wyoming State motto of “The Equality State”inferring that equality is non-existent in Wyoming. Could you help meunderstand exactly what you mean when you say “equality”?
Not everything is black or white. Never have I implied equality is completely non-existent. If you’ve been paying attention over the past few years, you’d understand what I mean. However, I’m feeling generous.
First, let’s start with Dictionary.com's definition of equality:
noun, plural -ties.
1.the state or quality of being equal; correspondence in quantity, degree, value, rank, or ability.
Now with the Wyoming Constitution:
Article 1, Section 2. Equality of all.
In their inherent right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, all members of the human race are equal.
Article 1, Section 3. Equal political rights.
Since equality in the enjoyment of natural and civil rights is only made sure through political equality, the laws of this state affecting the political rights and privileges of its citizens shall be without distinction of race, color, sex, or any circumstance or condition whatsoever other than individual incompetency, or unworthiness duly ascertained by a court of competent jurisdiction.
So equality in Wyoming is really for all people. And by all people, Marc, that means folks you and your BFFs may find distasteful. Every other legislative session, I go over the hill to testify against bills seeking to marginalize and discriminate against GLBTQ people in Wyoming. Bills you all testify in favor of regularly. I’ve heard my friends called diseased, broken, and sick - in a legislative committee! And don’t give me any of this “hate the sin, love the sinner” stuff. Even if you believe that, you are still hating one very core piece of an individual. If homosexuality is a choice, when did you wake up and choose to be straight? Could you, personally, choose to be gay? Doubt it.
I honestly don’t care that you folks believe America is a Judeo-Christian nation. That’s all well and good. However, when you start legislating from a religious book, that’s called a theocracy. Iran does it too. The Bible teaches valid moral lessons. So do many other religious books. I used to be Catholic. I’m now an atheist. My moral foundation did not change. Even without God, I still believe it’s wrong to kill people, steal, lie, etc.
From one of your articles:
"Gay couples are not lined up at city halls hoping for a marriage license… I have never believed that gays wanted to marry. Their behavior by its very nature is too promiscuous… Gay relationships are for the most part sexually open rather than exclusive… Gays are actively trying to destroy marriage and will take away our freedom of speech and religion in order to do it."
Here’s a photo of couples lined up at the Albany County Courthouse last Valentine’s Day to receive a marriage license:
So straight couples can enter into a 72-day marriage with a $10 mil. wedding a la Kim Kardashian, then seek a divorce, and God somehow is more cool with that than with any of these couples above getting married. Just for the record, my husband and I have been married for roughly 2.11 Kardashians.
Know what? Let Mrs. Betty Bowers break down “Traditional Marriage” for you:
Another quote from your articles:
Study after study has shown that gay “marriage” undermines the institution of marriage. In those societies where homosexual “marriage” has been tried, traditional marriage is increasingly discarded.
Citation needed. I want a peer-reviewed study endorsed by AMA, APA, or ASA. It’s okay, I’ll wait. Here’s Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn. dealing with one cited by conservatives often:
Funny that. So there’s no difference between same-sex and opposite-sex families?
I also enjoy that you use “Well, there’s not that many of them” as a justification. You’ve claimed roughly 1.7% of the population is homosexual. So what? Does that justify discrimination? 0.8% of the population is American Indian. Does their low number justify discrimination?
How, personally, has marriage equality kept you from enjoying your heterosexual marriage? If you want to see more of my thoughts, read these two letters.
If marriage equality passes in Wyoming, your church can still refuse to marry same-sex couples, much like a Catholic church can refuse to marry Baptists or those who don’t want to complete their pre-marital counseling.
Further, the opposition to marriage equality keeps boiling it down to sex and procreation. Is that all marriage is to you folks? Pumping out kids and occasionally sweating up the sheets? I see it as legitimization of a committed, loving relationship entered into by two consenting adults. Trust me, straight people can engage in some freaky, non-procreative sexual activity.
P.S. And about consent - marriage equality is not going to lead to bestiality or marrying brothers and sisters. Your cat cannot consent to a legal contract and legal precedent has validated the state’s interest in preventing close blood relatives from marrying - though there’s more states where you can marry first cousin than your same-sex partner. Any closer than that, and the courts have said no bueno. Supposedly, marriage between the races would lead to the same outcomes. Didn’t happen, but it’s just like how expanding voting rights led to hamsters voting, right? Slippery slope, y’know?
And railing about free speech and freedom of religion - no one is going to stop you from proclaiming gay people are ruining America. No one is going to force you to stop believing your chosen brand of Christianity.
Still with me?
As for gender equality, we’re somehow the equality state, yet my salary is likely to be 67% of a man’s for the same work. I deal regularly in my activism with people like yourself who want to regulate when I can bear children or my choice to not be pregnant - to not bring an unwanted child into the world. Or my choice to use reproductive services period, as evidenced by the nationwide fervor to defund Planned Parenthood.
So in summary, my vision of equality is a state (and a nation) where this debate is unnecessary because full equality for all exists.
I envision a state where my friends don’t have to spend thousands of dollars drawing up legal documents to make sure assets are protected in death. A state where, when I travel over the hill, I don’t hear my friends’ relationships reduced to sex acts, described in disgusting unreality simply to degrade them to a category somehow less than you. A state where my friends cannot be fired from their jobs simply for being gay. A state where their relationships can be acknowledged as marriage. A state where gay or straight doesn’t matter, because under the law, everyone has the same political rights regardless of sexual orientation. A state where, if I do the same work as a man, I don’t have to hope I’m getting paid in a similar fashion. A state where my uterus is none of your business. Somehow, shrinking government entails making it just small enough to fit in my uterus.
Is that all pretty clear?