All Created Equal?

This will probably be the easiest post I've ever written. Simply because, in my opinion, there's no logical opposition. Also the most preach-y, by far. I'm talking about same-sex marriage and why it's an embarrassingly bad case of history repeating itself. A modern day fight for civil rights. I understand this is controversial, but I'm just stating my strong opinion. I'm beginning it with the intention of making it short and sweet, but that almost never happens. So, here goes. I give you....

Top Five Arguments Against Gay Marriage

& Why They're Invalid

1.) The Bible says so.

 Does it? That's fantastic. You know what else the Bible says?

• Don't you dare eat that ham sandwich: And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you. Of their flesh shall ye not eat.

•  Women in church? Ugh! Fine, but be quiet: Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.    
•  Second marriages? Say what?!:  Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

Totally real, by the way. Why would you base your beliefs on a book of stories written 3500 years ago by, we'll assume, some apostles? I know this is controversial because a third of the world is Christian. However, from my perspective, it's unthinkable to allow your moral compass to be stubbornly stuck to this collection of tales from centuries ago when here we are, in real life, in modern society. We are people - real human beings - with all the same needs & desires (love, acceptance, safety, etc.). Why is one person more "valid" or worthy of these things than another?

And if for whatever reason, you insist on dividing the human race into castes based on your own criteria, you could at least put the Bible down and take note of a document more concrete, more recent and more relevant: The U.S. Constitution. If you refuse on seeing the natural equality among people, at least follow what we pledge in school every day or declare implicitly when we wave the American flag. All men are created equal. Although fairly sexist wording for today's world, it's right there in print. If you disagree, then change it. Ask the government to rewrite it as "People are relatively equal except for the following groups of individuals...." I doubt we could find enough people to support a legislation change of wording like that, regardless of our differences in beliefs. So until the foundation of our country is adapted to be as fickle and stubbornly judgmental as these anti-gay protestors, let's agree to actually follow the rules.
 

2.) Kids do better with a mom and a dad.

 Of all arguments, I understand this one the most. I absolutely recognize the benefits of having both a female and male role model in one's life. Unfortunately, just because we see the advantages of an ideal situation,

doesn't make it reality. This argument is based on the notion that all heterosexual couples lead a happily-married life under one roof. In reality, there are single parents raising children. There are grandparents raising their grandchildren. There are husbands and wives who hate each other and are raising their kids in a negative, unsupportive environment. 

I'm not saying one parent or parenting team is better than another. My point is that you can't declare such a thing. Children grow up in less-than-perfect environments all the time every day everywhere, regardless of who's running the household. The common denominator in a family that breeds well-rounded, well-adjusted, happy kids is the heart & devotion of the parent(s).

There are plenty of heterosexual couples raising imperfectly perfect kids and the same goes for their homosexual counterparts. There is no ideal. If one person, or a union of people, want to raise a child, I guarantee the love & support they provide will be all that baby needs to become a wonderful human being. Irrespective of his/her parents' sexual preference.

Here's one personal account:

3.) It's been that way forever.

 Mmm hmmm. I know! Change is hard. We're creatures of habit. Get over it. The world was also flat as a pancake, the atom was the smallest thing, and witches were burned at the stake on the regular.  

The Bible-based belief that men and women are the only ones worthy of a marriage license and equal rights may have seemed perfectly reasonable in the past, but here we find ourselves in modern day. We've made it through the worst of racial segregation, suffrage opposition, and - in the most drastic of examples - concentration camps. LGBT individuals and their allies have worked tirelessly to raise awareness and allow for people to openly be themselves for the first time ever. Just because it took them centuries to step out of the closet doesn't mean this closet is a recent development. Or, as I'll discuss later, the gays created a closet from nothing so they could step out of it.

"We're here, we're queer, so get over your fear." That's what the signs should say. 

In my opinion, the majority of the anti-gay perspective stems from fear. Exacerbated versions of natural human fears: fear of the unknown, fear of change, fear of what we don't understand. Well, at what point did these instincts supercede common sense and the acceptance of all human beings for what they are? Educate yourself. Don't know any gay people? Then, by definition, the judgment you're passing on them is coming from a place of ignorance. Open yourself up to meeting, learning about and accepting others around you instead of preaching from your small corner of the world at large.

4.) It validates and promotes the homosexual lifestyle.

If by "validates" and "promotes", you mean "allows everyone the right to be themselves without judgment, ridicule or shame", then YES. Yes, it does. These people aren't lepers. A gay man's preference for the same

gender is not contagious and in fact, does not affect anything at all. Except for that man's happiness, peace of mind and quality of life. It may make you anxious, but as we've learned in Item #3, that's your mountain to climb.

Let's say you're walking down the street with your young son, for example. A same-sex couple walk by on the opposite sidewalk holding hands. The likelihood of your son then spending his allowance on bedazzled jean cut-offs and asking Santa for a boyfriend is low. Unless, of course, said boy is already gay and/or happens to like those things. Essentially, it's quite possible that by opening your mind to the concept of equality, your children will learn to see the world through a sensitive, non-judgmental lens. And you can't have too many of those type of people walking around.

5.) Being gay is a choice. Therefore, gay people are choosing to ruin the sanctity of marriage.

Are people serious? Why would anyone actively choose to be different from and socially outcasted by half of the population? The choice that a person unfortunately has to make is not whether he/she is gay; it's whether or not he/she feels they have a support system and the self-confidence to let the world see him/her as they really are. A human being shouldn't have to weigh acceptance & love against the ability to live their life and feel comfortable in their own skin. These shouldn't be mutually exclusive. In a logical world, these would go hand-in-hand.

Again, homosexual people are not trying to creep up and "ruin" anything for heterosexuals. They'd just love to use the word "husband" or "wife", get the same medical and legal recognition, and feel validated. The divorce rate is currently above 50% in America anyway. And in the time it takes to eat lunch, a Hollywood marriage has come and gone. So what sanctity or success rate are we really debating here? Love is love.

Why pass judgment on something we've never experienced? Or treat it like it's so unbelievably foreign?

These are questions on a Heterosexual Questionnaire meant to help people see things from a new perspective. From where I'm standing, it supports everything I've been talking about:

1. What do you think caused your heterosexuality?
2. When and how did you first decide you were heterosexual?
3. Is it possible that your heterosexuality is just a phase you may grow out of?
4. Is it possible that your heterosexuality stems from a fear of others of the same sex?
5. If you have never slept with a member of your own sex, is it possible that you might be gay if you tried it?
6. If heterosexuality is normal, why are so many mental patients heterosexual?
7. Why do you heterosexual people try to seduce others into your lifestyle?
8. Why do you flaunt your heterosexuality? Can't you just be who you are and keep it quiet?
9. The great majority of child molesters are heterosexual. Do you consider it safe to expose your children to heterosexual teachers?
10. With all the societal support that marriage receives, the divorce rate is spiraling. Why are there so few stable relationships among heterosexual people?
11. Why are heterosexual people so promiscuous?
12. Would you want your children to be heterosexual, knowing the problems they would face, such as heartbreak, disease, and divorce? 

So I know this is just my opinion but it always feels good to stand up for something. Even if it is just in my tiny corner of the Internet. In closing, enjoy this genius song by a fearless, enlightened rapper:

Watch This. Don't Watch That.

So I've finished my latest long-term sub position and the only absences available in the per diem pool leave something to be desired. Unless I'm willing to make minimum wage teaching wood shop to urban high school seniors. (I'm good, thanks.) So what's a girl to do with all of this time in between working out, job hunting and applying for unemployment? Television, of course. A girl's best friend.

There are two shows in particular that I want to discuss, and they couldn't be more different. One is a show that I unfairly abandoned before even giving the pilot a chance; the other I realize I should've abandoned weeks ago. Let's break them each down respectively.

Breaking Bad 

I admit I sometimes judge books by their covers, movies by their posters and people by their faces. Television is no different. I'd been told about this show for over two years by pretty much everyone I know, as well as people I apparently knew at one point but are not ringing any bells on my News Feed. I continued to disregard their avid recommendations. This is their main character? Yeah, no. Archetypal guy show, I said, for sure.

Before I say anything, let's run down the basic framework of this show. Middle-aged chemistry teacher is diagnosed with cancer and starts cooking meth with a junkie ex-student to provide for his family postmortem. Said family? A brother-in-law in the DEA, a son with CP, and a lovely wife with an inappropriately low level of suspicion about the whole operation. Cue druglords, murder and overdose.

If I were a network executive, there's no way this pilot would even be made. On paper, it's a sick and twisted not-ready-for-TV plotline. But - you guessed it - I'm obsessed. I'm literally losing sleep over it. The writing is genius and suspenseful, the directing and camerawork is so creative, and the actors disappear into their characters.

Let's play a quick game called Things I've Said Out Loud to an Empty Room. I'll go first. "Oh my goddd." "Jesus Christ, get outta there." My personal favorite? Escaping in barely a whisper, "How does she knowwww?"

Oh, also? There's this eye candy to enjoy in all his law-breaking glory. 

Girls

On the other end of the spectrum, there's the kind of show that people love because everyone else loves it. I'm guilty! I bought into the whole masquerade, too. An updated, quirky Sex and the City for twenty somethings? Sure! 
  

Then the weirdness set in. I realized I don't relate to a single one of these characters. The shy paranoid one, the Bohemian hipster one, the whiny self-involved one, and the one that looks like she just stepped off the runway. Their problems in any given episode involve living in the city, having graphic weird sex with and/or marrying strangers, doing drugs in nightclubs, banging openly gay men, and tangential monologues in inappropriate situations. None of which I can personally relate to either.

Then there's the nudity. Now I'm not a total prude; a naked body is a naked body. But I'd have to conservatively estimate the ratio of unnecessary to necessary nudity on this show to be about 10:1. It's usually unprompted, inappropriate and painfully awkward.

Like I said, there was a good period of time where I was riding the Girls bandwagon. The critics love Hannah (Lena Dunham)'s fearlessness to write, direct and star in her own provocative scenes. "Good for her!" people say, "She's unapologetic for who she is and shines a spotlight on real women's bodies and insecurities." And if she's helping insecure people or people who feel like they're not represented on television, I'm being honest ... that's awesome.

For me, personally, I'm signing off. I can't watch another minute of this show. I refuse to watch her whine one more time about her problems while dancing around in a hideous onesie jumper, banging weird hot hippie strangers on a Sunday afternoon, then playing ping pong naked for no reason. Can't do it. I shouldn't have wasted my time watching a season and a half's worth of episodes thinking I'd find something I relate to or connect with anywhere in this show.

I might've just been watching for shots of this guy. It's a strong possibility.

The lesson here? I find more relateable emotion in the eyes of a crystal meth cook than a quirky twentysomething.

Wait..... what?