Apr 112011
Authors: Anna Baldwin and Eugene Daniels

By Anna Baldwin

I know a couple that sets aside one night every two weeks for a date night –– it’s just the two of them.
I easily figure out which night they are doing this when I immediately get her voicemail.

Usually, they go to a fancy schmancy dinner somewhere, followed by some Old Town action or a movie. At this point, my friends will usually communicate with me and other friends so everyone can meet up.

Usually my two friends are still feeling the love after their intimate dinner. As we wander around downtown, they are so adorable with hand-holding and other affection.

These friends of mine, this couple, is gay. But you wouldn’t know this fact just from this brief description of a glimpse into their relationship and lives.

What’s different between this relationship and a straight relationship? There’s the same love and commitment here. These two people want the same things as the majority of people –– marriage and companionship for the rest of their lives.

All relationships involve two people. People. Two people who are the same species and all have the capacity for feelings, thoughts and emotions.
So, why are these gay relationships and marriages seen as different? Why are these marriages illegal in most states in the U.S.?

Sometimes the doings and thoughts of other people baffle me, but the people who secure the exclusion of gay unions in our country is one of the biggest mysteries. For once, Eugene and I actually agree on something.

I recently read an article on TheOnion.com ­–– the online version of the satirical newspaper –– and this article was about an elementary school class in 2083.

In this U.S. history class, the students were learning about how in 2011 gay marriage was still illegal. These students couldn’t believe what they were hearing. Their thoughts in 2083 on the legal issues surrounding gay marriage 70 years prior could be summed up with one word: preposterous.

Of course, a person’s sexual orientation makes him or her different than another person, but each difference makes one unique, not inferior.
I propose a new law: marriage bans between people who don’t love each other.Marriage shouldn’t be regulated on a gender-basis.

By Eugene Daniels

Now usually, Anna and I use this column as a chance to make fun of each other. I say she’s going to be single and knitting sweaters for her cats, and she says I’m a momma’s boy.

But we decided we could use this platform to deal with something serious and controversial. And it doesn’t get more controversial than gay marriage.

For those of you who don’t know, in 2006, Colorado voters defeated a civil unions bill and instead voted to outlaw gay marriage. Amendment 43 stated that a marriage is only a union of one man and one woman.

In March of this year, another Civil Union Bill was in the hopper and passed the Colorado senate 23-12, but was shot down in the House by all of Sarah Palin’s people.

When I first started working on the column and started talking with guys on this subject, I expected a lot of negativity. But the weird thing is: It never came.

A group of guys I spoke with all said the exact same thing: That they don’t care. They said if someone wants to get married, then Uncle Sam needs to get out of the way and let it happen.

Some ladies said the same thing: if they were lesbians, they would want the same rights a man and woman in a union receive –– the same benefits, the same rights.

After talking with those groups, I sat down and tried to decide where I landed on the issue and the truth is –– I completely agree with what everyone said.

If gays and lesbians want to marry, who the hell are we to say they can’t? Straight people obviously can’t figure marriage out, as they divorce more than ever, nowadays. Allow the homosexual community the same rights.

The problem is we are allowing religion to be brought into government, and those two things are explicitly separated when dealing with the laws.

Unfortunately, in this scenario, it hasn’t been.

One thing I find confusing about our country is that it won’t stop a convicted rapist from fathering or mothering any kids but Sharon and Lisa can’t get married?

So for all of you idiots who don’t want it to happen, shut the hell up and go somewhere else because there’s no place for that crap here! Eugene said so!

_Anna Baldwin is a senior journalism major, and Eugene Daniels is a junior journalism major. Mars vs. Venus appears Tuesdays in the Collegian. Letters and feedback can be sent to letters@collegian.com

 Posted by at 3:25 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.