Snacka om att sätta i halsen, men ser inte ni också likheterna?! Behöver inte säga så mycket mer...



(bilden hittade jag här)

Jag och mamma har redan bestämt att jag kommer gifta mig i mammas klänning. Men allt annat kommer jag nog få välja själv, tror jag. Längtar gör jag i alla fall, även om absolut inget är planerat. Haha, så ingen som läser får för sig något. Fick bara ett sådant hemskt giftasflipp så jag var tvungen att söka på wedding cakes för att mätta begäret lite.

Tycker att dom här är "lite jag", något sådant vill jag nog ha. Dock skriker det inte speciellt mycket Sebastian. Men försök att hitta en tårta som passar tillsammans med 2 meter lång, 145 kg tung skäggig man? Så det blir nog rosa, i brist på annat...

The historical way of thinking about marriage is that it is a legal union between one man and one woman. These thoughts may descend from religion, tradition, ideology, or government views, but still, with a definition like that, the possibility for a same-sex marriage to happen is considered deviant. With this definition in mind, many Americans are fighting to keep these two forms of unions separated even if it, from my perspective, strays away from the constitutional rights. By keeping these two unions apart, and not allowing same-sex couples to get married, we are denying people their rights, such as having access to a spouse’s medical and life insurance, medical decision-making privileges, the right to refuse to testify against one’s spouse and many others. How come people think it’s more important to hold on to an old definition of what marriage is and what it isn’t, instead of fighting for equal rights for all people? Where does all this passion come from? Even though many defend the religious, traditional, ideological, and governmental views of marriage, I believe same-sex marriage should be legalized.

First of all, we have the religious views on same-sex marriages. Nearly 79% of the American population identify themselves as Christians, and the Bible clearly states that “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination” (Leviticus 18:22). Because a majority of the US population shares this belief, it doesn’t come as a surprise that same-sex marriages aren’t desirable for most of them. But still, why should their religious views take away the right of marriage from thousands of people? A common argument for same-sex marriage is that freedom of religion implies the right to freedom from religion as well. With that, I want to clarify that religious views should have absolutely no standing when it comes to American Law.

Second, we have the ones that either believe in tradition or have an ideology of life that makes them think about homosexuality and same-sex marriages as something unnatural and unlikely. Still, those beliefs only stand for them and their families. Every family has its traditions and beliefs, but those traditions can’t violate constitutional rights. One time, slavery was a tradition and the white man had an ideology that made him superior to the black man. This is history repeating! Just because marriage has always been one way doesn’t mean it should stay that way. And what happened to tradition when we legalized divorces? Divorces are right now, in my opinion, the biggest threat of them all when it comes to the sacred institution of marriage. It seems that the ones that have the right to marry are also the only ones that are allowed to change the rules and decide what is important to keep and what is not. And it also seems that the fact that a marriage has to be between a man and a woman is more important than “until death do us part.”

Last but not least, we have the government’s way of looking at same-sex marriages. According to the federal law, there is a public law called the Defense of Marriage Act. This law was founded recently, in 1996, and impels that no state in America has to legalize same-sex marriages if they don’t want to and that the government, as well as a majority of American population, defines a marriage as a “legal union between one man and one woman.” Not only is the government defining what a tradition is supposed to look like, it also tells the states that it is okay to discriminate against people because of their sexuality. And what happened to “the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?” I thought the government was supposed to defend the rights of its people and protect them from discrimination. Instead they are choosing sides based on an ancient definition of an institution that’s been changed in all other ways, except this one.