The issue of gay marriage is either about granting gay’s legal rights or it’s about chipping away at religion. If it is truly about giving equal rights, then the solution is easy, change the legal state sanctioned term for all. If it’s about chipping away at religion, then we will continue this senseless debate.

Some of you might be old enough to remember how the Stanford Cardinal were once called the Stanford Indians. They changed the name so not to offend American Indians, and rightly so. We have other sports team with American Indian nicknames. Should we change them all? Maybe so. Some people would say it’s not really offensive so leave it alone. Who’s right?

Why are we sensitive to some cultures but immune to the other cultures? Whether you like it or not religion is an integral part of American cultural fabric. You may want to ignore that or try and rewrite history, but that’s a fact.

So the real question remains, is this a simple matter of granting legal rights or is this a subversive attack on religious values?

I understand the importance the term ‘marriage’ has because of the religious associations made, however, the argument for gay marriage is not to allow same-sex unions to take place in churches but in courts officiated by government employees. Thus, marriage, in terms of religion, would not be changed within the realm of any particular religion but in terms of California’s, and eventually, our nation’s law. We do have to find something that works for all, and particularly because of that, I would also argue to uphold a church’s right to decide whom they’re willing to marry.

I agree that we should be tolerant of people’s beliefs but when it comes to religion, decisions like whom you’d like to marry, should not extend past the realm of that religion. When religious ideas exceed the boundaries of personal preference and invade a group’s right under the government’s law, a personal belief ceases to personal ‘truths’ but becomes a set of ideologies forced upon another group.

Finally, the issue with the marriage label is the fact that homosexual and heterosexual unions would both be under the same classification, that of a ‘marriage.’ If we created a new label to be used on both, it’s my guess the problem would remain, since the essential premise of the issue wouldn’t be changed: all relationships, regardless of gender, would be classified under one term.

Looking at the big picture, fighting for this equality is important to maintain all other freedoms, freedom of religion most definitely included.

An analogy would be to use the “N” word to describe a black person. While some Caucasians would not find it offensive form their perspective, I think most of us would agree that this word should not be used. That example and many other show how we pride ourselves on being a tolerant society. Yet we seem to be so willing and eager to throw Christians under the bus. Why? Shouldn’t we find a solution that works for everyone?
I recent ly saw news article about some students that are trying to put a measure on the ballot that would neutralize marriage for all. That measure would eliminate the term marriage for all (both gay and straight) and use an alternative term to describe the legal relationship. That is the direction we should go and stop bashing each other. Let’s make it a win-win for all and stop this winner take all mentality that only brings forth much grief.