One man, one woman. This is one of my favorite new sound bites introduced to the American lexicon. One man, one woman. I believe the introducing of this phrase comes to us from various religious groups. I find this view to be short sighted, at least in terms of the basis often used to justify the one man, one woman point of view. As far as can be historically proven, the (insert the holy book of your choice here) was written by people. Many will argue that the writing was divinely inspired, but I am talking about what can be historically proven, not faith. Beyond a holy book, others claim that their religious beliefs (religion being a man made construct) do not allow them to believe that two people in love should have the right to be married (marriage being another man made construct, a contract if you will).
I am left with two questions people who object to gay marriage never really provide an answer to that offers any real substance or reveals any thoughtfulness in terms of considering the plight of others. My questions are: why should the belief system that you subscribe to be used to pass judgement on the existence of others? Why do the lives of people you do not know and who will likely not effect your existence in any capacity matter to you so much so that you are willing to strip them of a right afforded to every heterosexual? One man, one woman. One way of thinking. One statement I stoutly disagree with. Hopefully the citizens of California will protect the deserved rights of their gay and lesbian friends.