At the heart of the position often presented opposing same-sex marriage is non-acceptance. The most intriguing response I've seen suggested to date is that marriage should be a private affair, separate from government. Some even go so far as to suggest the use of Domestic Relations Agreements.
When I hear about ideas such as Domestic Relations Agreements the word acceptance, or lack thereof, comes to mind. Why should there be two tiers of legislated recognition for the benefits that come from marriage? Why shouldn’t a same-sex couple get exactly the same title of marriage as different-sex couples?
To suggest the government get out of licensing marriages is by extension to insist that only religious organizations administer them. In turn, this can only lead to more influence given to religious organizations in the domain of secular administration. This leads to an increased focus on the physical world and results in a distraction for religious organizations at best. This position can only limit the choice of couples to have or not have a spiritual element to their marriage. This by extention is a form of non-acceptance.
On a more personal note, how can the marriage of two human beings harm another? This question is obviously rhetorical; no harm is done to others through the act of marriage alone.
No matter how hard I try to rationalize otherwise, I believe that at the heart of the position to debate for why someone should be denied the rights that others can have is a lack of acceptance. Whenever there is non-acceptance there is invariably some form of judgment. Speaking for myself at least, I really don’t feel drawn to the slippery slope of judging the behaviour of others.
Love is equal. Love does not have favourites. Love does not require that others adhere to the opinion of others. Love is in all, from within, through all, and as all. Love is waiting for us to love all.
And yet setting aside my passionate declaration of love aside, perhaps the reason I find myself so able to support same-sex marriage is my because of my belief system. I strive to live by the concept of acceptance. If the choice of other human beings brings no harm to others, or prevents others in someway from growing spiritually, then I view such actions as wholesome.
In stepping back to the larger topic of same-sex marriage, the only possible objection to equality in love is most often based upon a perceived offense to a belief or value system. However, this is not a sound spiritual argument for many reasons. Most notably – surely, God is above all this.
It is my experience that if something shows up in my experience that causes discomfort then this is a sign of my issues, my false beliefs, my fear, and my sense of separation. And surely, if I have such faith in the literal interpretation of a holy book or scriptures, how can the choice of another to disregard its' teachings in anyway shake my foundation? The spiritual connection for me around this is that the God that I experience, the God of my being, the God I know, the God I live to serve and express is an accepting, loving God. I believe that any perceived problem around the concept of marriage is a human creation.
Marriage as an idea ideally leads two people to committing to a loving, supporting, and nurturing relationship. Marriage is a choice that carries as many definitions and motivations as there are marriages. Each is unique. My position is the same as the God I know: Love, compassion, acceptance and peace. I strive to be the change I wish to see. On one hand, I accept the expression that is influenced by values and belief systems as simply that - an expression. I honour the right to express an opinion that brings no tangible harm to another. On the other hand, I also have a direct experience of a loving, compassionate, accepting and peaceful God.
God doesn't have any problems. God only has answers carried through possibilities of Love. If God doesn't have a problem with marriage, then how could I? I support equality in marriage regardless of gender.