Massachusetts Daily Collegian

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

Massachusetts Daily Collegian

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

Massachusetts Daily Collegian

The same-sex marriage debate is stupid


On Wednesday, the Obama administration established a new precedent by no longer backing the Defense of Marriage Act, the 1996 federal law that barred same-sex marriage from being recognized. The law acted as a defense against lawsuits deeming the ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional and its repeal will stop the Department of Justice from blocking those lawsuits.

In short: Why? Because, why not?

The idea that people have decided that marriage in same-sex couples is the final straw for morality is just stupid.

Do you think it’s “soiling the name of marriage?” Well, people get accidentally married in Las Vegas all the time. My friend Jess and her friends in Boston became ordained ministers of the Universal Life Church and marry each other when they’re bored and then annul them so they’re not legally binding.

Don’t think same-sex couples create a positive family environment? Too bad. Same-sex couples exist everywhere and function in every capacity except that they lack the legal rights of married couples. That means that same-sex couples often don’t have hospital visitation rights or the ability to share health insurance. It’s just mean at this point.

Massachusetts residents should also be particularly aware of how prevalent same-sex couples are. This state has both Provincetown and Northampton. Same-sex couples aren’t going away and people should stop ignoring them.

Believe couples not being able to produce children is wrong? We’re not running out of children in foster homes any time soon. Callously speaking, we have too many kids. Having same-sex couples as a major market for adopting children even helps try and combat the other thing that people who oppose same-sex marriage also hate: abortion. This way, there’s no argument over whether somebody dies in the process.

The prolonged banning of same-sex marriage in America is the most absurd policy enforced by the United States government since Japanese-Americans were put into internment camps in 1942 following the attack on Pearl Harbor. It’s one of those things that 90 percent of grandchildren will look back upon and think that we were all homophobic, the same way we think all old people are racist. Or, as a convenient article in The Onion put it: “Future U.S. History students: ‘It’s pretty embarrassing how long you guys took to legalize gay marriage.”

It’s confusing. Are there people fully expecting that there will never be gay marriage? Are there really people who are seriously pleased to go through life knowing that people who already participate in same-sex relationships aren’t allowed to marry?

Again, it’s just mean at this point.

People have marked social conservatives as on the wrong side of history, in the same way they were on the wrong side of history during the civil rights movement. That is, openly protesting that takes nothing away from those who oppose it. There’s no real point other than the fact that they don’t like it, find it icky and are religiously opposed. That is, they call same-sex marriage an “abomination,” citing a passage from Leviticus in the Old Testament, which, in fact, doesn’t mention marriage at all.

Leviticus, of course, still remains legally binding in the United States Constitution, which explicitly separates the powers of church and state, banning the following things: tattoos, touching a pig’s skin, shellfish, divorce, wearing blended fabrics and fortune telling. So, we’ve got to make sure all divorced, shellfish-eating football players wearing polyester shirts and calling fortune telling hotlines are faced with the harshest punishment.

It’s either that, or stop the absurdity that is the legal restrictions on same-sex couples. Congress did something right with the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” which, like bringing in African Americans or women into the military will cause some issues.

But people will get over it.

This isn’t an issue of love, religion or family. It’s about titles and whether or not all people are allowed the title of marriage for their relationships. People can be opposed to same-sex relationships all they want. That is their right. But to legally bind citizens from being married because others don’t like it is absurd.

It’s just mean.

Nick O’Malley is a Collegian columnist. He can be reached at [email protected].

View Comments (1)
More to Discover

Comments (1)

All Massachusetts Daily Collegian Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • U

    Universal Life ChurchFeb 25, 2011 at 2:10 am

    You mention Universal Life Church – Here’s a blog I recently wrote and published to our Universal Life Church Ministers entitled: “Who Did You Last Have Sex With?” I thought it was an appropriate comment

    Who did you last have sex with?
    Posted on February 19, 2011 at 4:25 AM

    LGBT, Homosexual, Same Sex Union, Same Sex Marriage I do not believe this should be a Religious Issue, nor do I believe there should be any law of man forbidding such sexual preferences or lifestyle.

    I do not care what Leviticus says. I do not care what the Roman Catholic Church says. The Bible is not meant to be a means for us to police one another, but rather it is meant to help us improve our individual relationships with our Lord Jesus Christ. From a Religious Standpoint as leader of the Universal Life Church when asked what our stance is regarding the LGBT Community or Same Sex Marriage, I have no response except to say: God is the only one who has the authority to render judgment. It is not my place, the Churches place or your place to do so.

    Personally I am heterosexual, I have never had sex with a man, I do not understand how a man can be attracted to another man or how a man could even want to engage in sexual relations with another man.

    Despite my personal opinion I can’t base my opinion on any decision I make regarding the sexual desires of another man. Thats like saying just because I enjoy creamer in my coffee or Diet Pepsi over Diet Coke, every other man on this planet has to share the same opinion.

    I think it is foolish to make such a big deal about this and the Pope & President have other issues to deal with. Who our neighbor is sleeping with, or who gets married to who is the individuals business, not anyone else’s.

    We will each answer to God for our actions and it will be God who passes judgment. Personally, I just hope the last person you had sex with was who you wanted to have sex with.

    The Only Official Certified & Verified Ordinations
    or Degree’s Website With the Trust-Guard Seal

    Official Universal Life Church Website –