The equality of 100…

100 is a pretty important number.  Without it, we couldn’t do percentage statistics.  And we all know how we like those statistics.  [Okay, I’ll admit that I’m a little weird.]

We base so much information in our everyday lives on this number and others.  Right now, though, I want to talk about some other numbers.


That is the number of years my brother and his partner have been together. 


The number of times Elizabeth Taylor (RIP) married.


Number of marriage licenses granted in Clark County, NV (home of Las Vegas).  See here.


Number of days Kim Kardashian was married before petitioning for divorce (she’s still legally married).


The number of federal benefits and responsibilities surrounding marriage.  See here.


The number of invitations to my brother’s wedding I will be receiving.  [FYI, I am not in any way implying he and his partner are wanting to get married, but highlighting the fact that they cannot.]

So people like Kim Kardashian can wed and divorce who they want with no legal repercussions, but my brother and his partner don’t have the right to marry each other.

And before we get into a religious debate, I am talking about the legal right to marry.  They are not legally able to obtain a wedding license.  Per this website, in some locations, a prisoner can get married by proxy, but my brother and his partner of 9 years are not legally entitled to the same right. 

The people that can officiate at a wedding range from religious leaders to judges to county clerks, depending on the locale.  I have no problems with a religious leader refusing to perform a marriage ceremony for religious reasons.  But what basis does the judge or the county clerk have to refuse to officiate?  Religion?  Because that certainly seems to harken back to the Constitution’s Separation of Church and State concept.  Beyond arbitrarily created laws, what legal reason is there to deny a same-sex couple the right to marry?

Please see this site for more concrete information about the legal right to marry versus the religious right to marry.   Right now, it would be easier for my brother and his partner to find a religious officiant to marry them “illegally” than not. How is it that there are religious institutions willing to marry to members of the same sex that have demonstrated their desire to do so, but the law will not allow it?

Some people disagree with the concept of homosexuality.  That honestly doesn’t have anything to do with the argument about equal marriage rights.  Refusing to allow homosexuals the legal right to marry is declaring their feelings, relationships, and families invalid.   I am pretty sure my brother’s feelings and relationship are as valid (if not moreso) than Britney Spears, Dennis Rodman, Nicolas Cage, Pamela Anderson, and Rudolph Valentino (all of whom had marriages that lasted less than 5 months before a petition for divorce was filed).  According to this, I have a better legal right to marry than my brother, even though my longest relationship was 6 months…if we stretch it. 

I find it reprehensible that the appearance of the person my brother loves is more important than the emotional bond between them.  Does that mean that a county clerk can refuse to marry me to someone if they believe I don’t “look right” for that person?  To me, that is what the legal argument comes down to. 

I would rather attend the wedding of my brother to his partner than get a gilded invitation to a wedding that is over before the first anniversary.  Too bad my chances for the latter are so much higher than the former.

I am sure I should apologize for the randomness of this post, but the sentiment behind it was sound, even if the execution was pretty sad.  For my 100th post, I wanted to talk about something that matters to me on a lot of levels.  I honestly have no idea about my brother’s relationship (and neither want nor need to know more), but the fact that he is told by the world that his feelings are invalid hurts me.  I truly cannot comprehend why it matters to someone else what happens in his bedroom when the door is shut.  Why does what happens in that bedroom matter so much when his partner is the same sex?  If his partner were the opposite sex, what happened when the door shut would be both private and uninteresting.  Instead, he and his partner are vilified and condemned for that most elevated of emotions–love.

And if [your Creator of choice] wants to condemn homosexuals for loving someone of the same sex…let [Him/Her/Them/It] do it and leave faulty human judgement out of the whole thing.


~ by theartistryofthebipolarbrain on May 4, 2012.

19 Responses to “The equality of 100…”

  1. Well, I have always looked at it this way, why is the government involved in who we marry in the first place? I do not get that. It shouldn’t be a Government issue. It is marriage simple as that. So, to me it seems that the Government is trying to not only control the laws of the land but also trying to control the laws of the bible also. That is supposed to be off limits to them. Because that is the only issue here. there is no legal reason why there should be sanctions on marriage adn who marries whom. All there is is a bible verse. That is it. So, clearly the government is stepping into waters they don’t belong.
    Personally, I don’t know how I feel about gay marriage, or marriage at all really. I know what it is like to be too young to know what homosexuality is but knowing I had a special feeling for girls, not really sexual quite yet, but looking back it was definately special. So religously, I am not sure about the bibles complete acuracy altogether completely. But if two people felt that it was the right thing for them to do, to get married, I would find someone religous or not to officiate a ceremony and celebrate. Then have a lawyer take care of wills, aggreements and such until things change. After all what else is marriage? Just a piece of paper anyway, and like you say about divorce, it doesn’t make it any more stable.

    • I don’t know why the government has their hands in the marriage pie, either. Well, except for the whole making money aspect. I also have issues with states not recognizing marriages that are legal in other states. As I recall, all states are supposed to recognize the laws of the other states.

      • it’s just an example of big Government and how much we dont even realize they have their nose in everything people do. Why should anyone have to get permission to marry another person?? It will have no impact on our country nor will it change anything nationally that conserns them. I guess that is why, if I wanted to marry a woman, I would have my wedding and let my girl have the kind of ceremony she’s dreamed of and say our vows before anyone that has the rights to do so (you know you can get the right to perform a ceremony over the internet if you want) Do the whole shindig. Go fix all the legal stuff such as wills and what else with the lawyer and live happily ever after. Screw the government. All they have to offer is a piece of paper. This country is never going to get things together anyway, so why wait for it?

      • *LOL* I like your thought process. And I know that that is a very necessary way to deal with sharing your life with someone the rest of the world doesn’t recognize as your partner. But why should you have to pay a lawyer for your partner to be able to see you if you are in an accident? Why should you have to pay a lawyer for your partner to be able to make medical decisions for you if you are in said accident? If the birth family doesn’t accept your relationship with said person, they can make it impossible for you to see him or her in that situation unless y’all have paid a lawyer to change that. I feel like it’s a ridiculous restriction that just doesn’t make sense in today’s world.

      • Oh I do too. It is ridiculous. Im only saying, why wait for the government to get on board though. You know how I am, if it is logical to me, screw whoever says I can’t lol

  2. Amen! (lol) I am totally with you on this — so much so that I am going to reblog it. I hope you don’t mind. Actually, yesterday I was thinking about writing a post on this very topic. But you’ve done such a great job, I will use yours. 🙂

  3. Reblogged this on The Bipolar Dance and commented:
    Yesterday I started thinking about writing a post on this subject, with statistics and so forth, but since it has already been done so well by the artistry of the bipolar brain, I have chosen to reblog instead.

  4. I’m with you 100%! Very well written, and I hope we see the day when this Changes! Congrats to your brother and his partner on 9 years! That is fantastic!

  5. I am behind you 100%!!!

  6. I couldn’t log in, for some reason it didn’t recognize my sign in name or email so I redid everything. Hopefully it will recognize me next time. Anyway I’m 100% behind you. 😉

  7. I was just thinking, why is it that they don’t want religion in our school system or any part of the government but now it’s OK to use religion for this issue. What a crock of shit. Anyway have a good weekend and I will see you Tuesday.

    • I think it’s a good question as to why we are allowing religion to creep into more and more aspects of our government. Currently, there are states that don’t allow specific topics to be taught in the schools based on…Well, they say it is to “protect our youth”, but there are studies that prove it doesn’t work. For example, I have no problems with teaching kids abstinence…alongside birth control. Because assuming kids will follow the abstinence concept is asking for a slew of teenage pregnancies. Since there are scientific studies that show teaching kids about birth control lowers the rate of teenage pregnancy and STD infection, what reason can they give? The only other argument that I have heard is that people shouldn’t be having sex before marriage. By and large, that is a religious argument. [Yes, I know there are people that just want their child to be committed to one person before making such a big decision, but they are in a minority for this argument.] So here’s a religious situation that has not just creeped, but jumped and screamed into the middle of our public school system. *sighs*

  8. see my opinion here is that it isn’t the governments job to keep Americans in line morally. That is a personal thing that everyone has to work out between them and God. the government shouldn’t make decisions on the grounds of religion. They shouldn’t have to. We all have our own conscience. So we each are responsible to make the right decisions for our kids and teenagers on these matters. When they become adults, then it is up to them. There is no room for the government in that.

  9. Good, sound comments. Sad situation!!


  10. I’m glad you did a post on this.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: