Thursday, January 19, 2006

The concept of marriage as the union between two people who love eachother in the eyes of God is a relatively new idea. If you have ever been married, in the legal or unrecognized way, you'll know that living with you partner brings great economic benefit: twice the income and half the rent.

This economic version of marriage has been the most common until the emergence of 'romantic love,' which is the idea that people could marry eachother for more than their dowry, or political integration of family lines. Traditionally, marriage is the recognition of a man owning a woman, with the father giving her away. Also note that this is the tradition of one particular American Mainstream culture, as there are many other binding ceremonies practiced throughout the world and within the United States.

However, I have heard the argument that the 'sanctity of marriage' is at risk, especially with these gays running around challenging everything.

What I don't understand is how a group of people showing up, saying, 'wow, we'd really like to limit our relationship practices to conform your ideology' constitutes a horrible challenge to the sanctity of a practice...

Unless they're talking about the traditional definition of man owning a woman. Can't have two individuals of the same social standing engaged in a tradition that sells one person to another, now can we? Who with own who in this new type of relationship?

As I see it, 'traditional' marriage is really in jeopardy, just not a jeopardy cause by gays. In fact, should the 'traditional' definition of marriage continue, I'm pretty convinced that the concept of marriage will become outdated. It's just not suited to our new, indiviualistic, emancipated society.

Wouldn't that mean that gays are actually offering to help preserve a conservative fundamentalist Christian tradition. Why, yes, it would indicate that we're doing this. Even though gay marriage happens around the country, even though it's not recognized by law, the rights can be partially compensated for by miles of paperwork and legal filings, we still seek equality, but an equality that conforms to a particular religious viewpoint.

So my question still remains, why all the horror by the conservative, Christian right? You'd think they'd be all about this, but alas, the day has come when gays are defending the conservative agenda while the Christians are working against their own cultural survival. And might I say, it's an odd day indeed.

Friday, January 06, 2006

There are stories of my people leaving central Texas, the land of our birth.

In these strange lands, the Earth does not want us, because we are not where we belong.

The Earth shakes and trembles, making us weak and homesick. Crops die in memory of a place where we did not hunger and had no disease. Water turns sloid in an attempt to make us thirsty. Yet, we travel.

Away from the place that we were created to inhabit.

One day, I shall return, but today is not that day.

Though I may cough. Though I may shed tears. I know where my home is. One day, the land will guide me safely back.

There are more stories. Stories hear by a little child, many years ago.

Now I read these stories in a book, where I did not expect to find them. They are from an antiquated people who I fear I shall never know. Stuffed between two hard covers, in numberless leaves of paper. The stories are from a people back in central Texas.

The Earth shakes as water turns solid. The little boy cannot help but wonder what makes the distant land his home. The stories? The people? Or perhaps it is a simple as 'because you were created there, and there was created for you.'