Standalone post and a comment in my classmate's blog

In response to http://seankaskel.blogspot.com/

          I do not personally have any issue with a man or woman of the same sex marrying each other neither do I advocate for same sex marriage. Based on my Catholic upbringing and culture, I have only known marriage as a sacrament (holy union) between a man and a woman, as a senator once joked, “ God created and Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve, as if these were Americans or Anglo-Saxons.

  On Thursday, March 28, 2013, My classmate published an article titled "My colleague’s argument supporting same sex marriage while it is interesting and even convincing, I am concerned that it appears to be confusing two separate, though fundamental issues.

          My colleague’s makes strong argument regarding laws that she considers in today’s America as absolute or archaic. This argument is rather fallacious in the sense that while it argues that governments (states/federal) should legalize same sex marriage, it also seems to be arguing that the same government(S) should keep their hands away from individual’s right to marry whomever he/she wishes to marry. By asking government to legalized same sex marriage, it also seems to be granting the same government more power to regulate/legislate individual’s private affair.

          While it is true that almost half of heterosexual or traditional marriages in American in the last several years end up in divorce, several factors are responsible for this trend. One may even say that “the new or openness or more acceptance of it by more people of same sex relationship/marriage may be a contributing factor to this trend. The fact is in my personal opinion, that most people who are now considered open gay or lesbians have once been involved in some sort of heterosexual relationship or marriage at some point before they now discover that they are fully Lesbian or Gay.

          Why is easy for the same sex advocate to quiet easily go after the government yet say little or nothing about religious institutions that are supposed to the protector of the rejected and  oppressed people of the society? Why are the battles of same sex marriage not fought in the churches, synagogues, mosques and of the world?

          My colleague’s write up confuses individual’s fundamental right with cohabitation right.

          My colleague’s argument would be more profound and even more convincing if it advocated more added right or privilege for individual who choose to cohabitate rather the use of the word “marriage”. It would be interesting to find out if at all Lesbianism was part of human evolution or creation and if so, how did the framers of the constitution dealt with it, and if it is not, how  and when did it evolve in today’s world and what is the cause of it?.  Are there historical context for this or not. We have heard stories of witches and wizard for example, and how the laws dealt with such. Is the issue of same sex marriage, one between the heterosexual and the non-heterosexual (Gay and Lesbian) or government and some segments of her population? Is the issue here, between marital benefits of same sex individuals and those of heterosexuals, or the government denial of individual’s right for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? These are several issues my colleague’s argument failed to explore or clarify.