Contact the author: popcultureslut@hotmail.com

Back in the 1950's and 60's, when Martin Luther King Jr was changing the world with his writings, speeches and actions, many people, including African-Americans, told him to slow down. "Slow down", they insisted, "the world isn't ready for all these mass protests and demonstrations. The social structure in America is a stubborn one, and change must come through legislation and through legal means."

But King knew that freedom didn't come without sacrifice, and freedom could not be negotiated.

And so when the news that San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, inspired by the impending doom effect that President Bush's State of the Union Address created, was handing out marriage licenses to gay couples began receiving nation-wide coverage, Bush and his White House cronies scrambled to figure out how to address the situation. The solution- Bush would issue a Constitutional Amendment in order to ban gay marriages. And so homosexuals, priests and politicians duked it out all over the American networks.

But how important is this issue that there has to be a Constitutional Amendment? Is it as important as, say, the abolition of slavery? Women's right to vote? The "guns, God, and government" mentality of the current administration has shown a blatant disregard for other cultures and creeds, and is now in the process of alienating homosexuals.

An important political ideology that Bush has failed to grasp is the saparation of Church and the State. Why is this important? One needs only to remember 1930's Germany, when the Vatican dismantled the Catholic Centre Party when it became apparent that Hitler's National Socialists would become the ruling party. Hitler promised privileges for the church if the Vatican pressured the Cathoilc Centre, his biggest opposition, to fold. He got his wish, and what followed was the persecution of Christians all over Germany, along with the closing of many cathedrals. But then again, the Vatican was no match for the Fuhrer.

But I digress.

The real reasons why gay marriages are frowned upon are attributed to the teachings of Christianity. On CNN's Larry King Live, Mayor Newsom's reasoning for advocating the union of gay couples fell on the deaf ears of Pastor John Macarthur, who asked Newsom if he believed that the Bible was the Word of God. Newsom said he did, but wanted gay couples to have the same rights and freedoms that he and his wife enjoyed. He was constantly reminded that what he was doing was illegal.

Just like it was illegal for a black student in the South to enter a white college in the 1950's, right?

The real issue here is the definition of marriage. If it is defined strictly in Christian terms, then gay couples should not be able to get "married" and an alternative union should be provided. But right-wing sociologists oppose this seemingly reasonable solution. James Dobson, founder of "Focus On The Family", argues that a civil union versus marriage is still considered a sort of "quasi" marriage, and any union between gays will affect and jeopardize marriage between a man and a woman.

Have you ever heard of such a hair-brained theory? the Republicans and the Catholic clergy is so anti-gay, yet they're continually fucking eachother in the ass.

Look, if gay couples want to be united, they should be able to do so without ridicule or repercussion. The evolution of man will not be threatened just because a bunch of homosexuals want to get hitched. Obviously, God intended a man and a woman to procreate, otherwise She wouldn't have provided us with penises and vaginas. But let's allow God to be the judge of that.

Since the United States is made up of citizens of different religious backgrounds, it is ridiculous that Christianity is being allowed to permeate the American social structure because the American President thinks it should. No organized religion should dictate the legal or ethical standards of a human being.

So in a hundred years from now, when organized religions are extinct are superfluous, and people are judged, as King so eloquently put it, "by the content of their character", we'll look back with incredulity that these arguments even took place to begin with. Because before there is religion, before there is politics, there is an innate desire in human beings to love and have that love be reciprocated, regardless of their sexual orientation. I can't believe I just wrote that.

But I did, so it must be true.

© 2004 Aaron Bayley