Legalizing same-sex marriages is a hot topic in states across the nation. On April 14 the federal court ruled that Ohio must recognize legal same-sex marriages performed in other states. Texas is in the same boat, as a federal judge struck down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage on February 26, but left it in place pending a ruling by an appeals court later this year. These decisions were made under the ruling that the bans violate the equal protection and due process clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States constitution. While the issue is gaining ground, it is still very controversial. Read below about two different student stances on the issue of same-sex marriage.
Gay People Exist – Amy Bogucki
Disney Channel’s show “Good Luck Charlie” recently aired an episode featuring a kid with two moms, operating under the premise, I’m sure, that gay people exist. It’s the media’s responsibility to reflect society and represent its consumer, so it really shouldn’t come as a surprise that there were gay characters, seeing as how GAY PEOPLE EXIST.
That being said, there has been something of a backlash proceeding this decision. In particular, the conservative advocacy organization One Million Moms has been vocal about their disapproval, claiming that, not only was Disney presenting “controversial topics that children are far too young to comprehend,” but also that “mature issues of this nature are being introduced too early and too soon, and it is extremely unnecessary.”
Kids aren’t stupid. They’re a little ignorant by default, but it’s their parents’ responsibility to remedy that. Unless someone is exposed to every side of an issue, there’s no way they can form an opinion. Denying the existence of gay people will not make them exist any less, and blatantly censoring anything instantly creates a stigma about it.
And what does “mature issues” mean? From what I saw, two people brought their daughter to a friend’s house for a playdate, and as it happened, those people were both women. Playdates don’t really sound like a mature issue to me. You want to talk about mature issues, let’s examine how Charlie’s mom, Amy, clearly has a borderline superiority complex and subsequently intellectually undermines her husband in that clip. But I digress.
The opposition to the decision is, fortunately, in the minority. The show previously received consistent high ratings and acclaim, and chose to end its four-year run with an hour-long series finale on February 16. People can’t very well boycott the show directly now, but attempts are being made to boycott Disney itself. However, the change in viewership is negligible overall, since Disney is such a multifaceted and prominent company.
It’s notable that this decision aligns completely with Disney’s mission statement, which claims that, “The Walt Disney Company’s objective is to be one of the world’s leading producers and providers of entertainment and information.” They are being both entertaining and informative by providing a respectful portrayal of an alternative family in a non-threatening environment. Kids that see this on TV can immediately ask their parents questions if they are confused, and the parents can use it as an opportunity to educate them however they see fit.
This is a civil rights issue. There are human beings who are not receiving the same respect and representation as other human beings. Discouraging exposure to diversity is inherently encouraging close-mindedness and displays a fear of progress and equality. Kids aren’t mystified and frightened when they see Cinderella and Prince Charming share true love’s kiss, so why is it assumed that a different kind of love is going to stump them?
Homosexuality isn’t going to go away just because it’s shoved under the rug for awhile. We are in the middle of a revolution. Change is happening here and now, and every kid deserves to see that.
And hopefully they’ll outgrow some of the bigoted and retrogressive views that seem to be acceptable today.
Disney Should Straighten Up – Darby Blaylock
I am a Christian, I believe in following God’s word, and I will stand by that. With that being said, I get offended when people try to push their own beliefs on me. I don’t care what they might believe when those beliefs are kept silent, but when they make it public and try and change my beliefs I have to speak out against it.
I believe that God made us to be compatible with the opposite sex. and that it is a sin to have a sexual relationship with the same sex. In the book of Leviticus 20:13, “if a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.”
That is my basis for saying gay marriage isn’t morally right and it’s against my religion.
When people make their same sex relationship public it’s uncomfortable for me, it’s not the way it’s supposed to be, and in some states, “cough cough 33”, it’s banned.
I was in shock when I turned on my TV a while back to find a lesbian couple on a Disney Channel show. The show “Good Luck Charlie” (which is no longer airing as of mid February) was on and in this specific episode, “The Duncan’s” daughter Charlie is having a play date with another little girl who happens to have two moms.
People.com said the story line was first announced last year as part of Disney’s continuous effort to “be relevant to kids and families around the world and to reflect themes of diversity and inclusiveness.” What concerns me is that this is not necessary. 17 states have legally recognized same sex marriage. Would Disney Channel allow marijuana on their shows? I mean isn’t that “relevant to kids and families”? And it’s legal in a few states. So why not? The Disney Channel is geared towards kids ages 6-14 and their families. That is the most critical time in a child’s life for they are influenced immensely by media and Disney should not have a same sex married couple on any of its shows.
My theory is they want to introduce their young viewers to gay and lesbian relationships early on, so viewers aren’t surprised when their favorite Disney character turns out to be bisexual.
Speaking of former Disney Channel stars, Miley Cyrus, lead actor of the hit series Hannah Montana praised Disney for its decision. She tweeted “I commend Disney for making this step into the light of this generation. They control so much of what kids think!”
Excuse me Miley, but I don’t think a network should “control what kids think”. They should entertain and inform but not take a stance on social issues as controversial as this.
Same sex marriages are wrong and immoral. Not only should such relationships be banned, but they should also stay off the television screens of little children.
While we encourage a healthy discussion on all posts, due to the controversial nature of the topic, no comments will be posted without a verified name and email address. The Red Ledger editorial staff asks that all readers please be respectful of other’s beliefs.
Bruce Tiff • Apr 30, 2014 at 1:09 am
Many people passionately support the most remarkable and radical change in modern social history — the redefinition of marriage from male-female to include male-male and female-female. I don’t like to call it gay marriage as marriage was instituted by God as between a man & women. The definition is what it is.
Marriage is the building block of society. Changing its nature will therefore change society. Among other things, same-sex marriage means that because sex (now called “gender”) no longer matters for society’s most important institution, it no longer matters in general.
Men and women as distinct entities no longer have significance. Which is exactly what the cultural left and the gay rights movement advocate — even though the vast majority of Americans who support same-sex marriage do not realize that this is what they are supporting. Most Americans who support same-sex marriage feel (and “feel” is the crucial verb here, as the change to same-sex marriage is much more felt than thought through) that gays should have the right to marry a member of their own sex. It is perceived as unfair to gays that they cannot do so. And that is true. It is unfair to gays.
But the price paid for eliminating this unfairness is enormous: It is the end of marriage as every society has known it. And it is more than that. It is the end of any significance to gender. Men and women are now declared interchangeable.
If the argument for redefining marriage is that they are loving adults and should have same legal “rights” to marry then how do you stop the same argument from being applied to polygomists or even brother marrying brother or sister marrying sister? Think I’m crazy, well just give it some time or a few months whatever comes sooner.
I have read the prior comments that homosexuality is a sin and I agree. There are many sins and as God’s creation since the fall of mankind we are all sinners. But as such we should fight our sinful thoughts & behavior and strive to not sin. Although we are incapable of doing that perfectly Christ has done it for us and has given us our salvation. And through Him with faith we are saved. Choosing to openly accept and live in sin is the issue, Simply saying we are sinful and accepting sinful behavior is okay is not the same thing. Just as I would not want openly adulterous couples in my church I would not want openly gay couples or polygamists. We should pray that they would see the error in their ways and strive to not be sinful. Fighting sin is different than accepting it.
Rebecca Gleason • Apr 25, 2014 at 9:45 am
i fail to see why this subject sparks such a huge debate. Yes it may be considered a sin, but we are all sinners and who are we to condemn others that sin as well? We may have an opinion but it is not us to us to say that gay people shouldn’t be married, how is their marriage going to affect us? it wont. If gay people want to get married let them do so, even if it is a sin. Our condemnation is nothing short of hypocrisy. Who are we to deny someone happiness in a life-long commitment? So gay people want to spend the rest of their life in a binding contract with someone of the same sex, let them do so. Their marriage wont effect us. Let them sin, we all sin, and we should love everyone no matter what and standing to condemn them when it doesn’t effect us is extremely hypocritical.
Olivia Griffin • Apr 28, 2014 at 11:59 am
The thing about marriage is that it isn’t just about the ring on your finger or the actual ceremony – there are many more things that gay couples cannot have because they cannot legally be recognized as married. Some insurance policies will not let a person place other people on their plan unless they are immediate family, ie. married, and so if they aren’t married, they can’t receive the health care benefits of their partner like a married heterosexual couple would. This leaves them minimal choices: pay a ridiculous amount for private insurance, go to work full-time to get covered, or not have coverage and pray that they don’t have a sudden medical emergency that could rack up hundreds of thousands in medical bills. That’s why there’s such a push for same-sex marriage today.
Andrew Kalinke • Apr 24, 2014 at 6:29 pm
Darby, when you started slinging verses from Leviticus I immediately knew verses like Doug’s would be brought up. While Noah seemed to explain well while Doug’s verses are no longer applicable, he didn’t seem to explain why yours aren’t appropriate. You quoted Leviticus 20:13, which says “if a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.” I’m not sure if you really took a close look at the verse before putting it in the article, but it calls for the death of all gays! Surely a god who would send down his one and only son to die for us wouldn’t continue such a harsh policy. As Noah pointed out, when Jesus came down to earth and gave his life for us, the law of the old testament was broken, and the new testament of the living god was laid down. (The new testament). An appropriate verse to quote that conveyed a similar message would be any of the following verses : 1 Kings 14:24, 1 Kings 15:12, Romans 1:18-32, or 1 Corinthians 6:9-11. (The last one is probably best). In addition to this, I feel like its a shame that the only article related to christianity on the red ledger is this. While this is on the judgmental side, the new testament is NOT. Infact, the new testament teaches of love and understanding and while all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of god, and the wages of sin is death, the gift of god is eternal life through our lord jesus! (That was a mash up of romans 6:23 and 3:23 and romans 5:8). Another thing is that in the article, you make it seem like homosexuality is the worst sin of them all, and that everyone who is gay is basically satanist.( That was an exaggeration but you get the idea). In reality Darby, all sins are equal in the eyes of the lord, and sadly, the wages of our sin is death. Luckily for us, the gift of god is eternal life through Christ Jesus, our lord and savior! If you dont understand this concept I will repeat it : All sins are equal. That means all the times that you have told little white lies, gossiped, had a bad attitude, complained, or back talked your parents, you have been equally sinful comparatively to someone that is a practicing homosexual. If you are ready to get up in arms about all of those things and can honestly say you have never done any of the listed things, than feel free to judge. On the other hand, we both know as christians that the only sinless human being died on the cross for our sins. The final thing i will point out is that though the bible is technically anti-gay, it isn’t anti-gay people. The new testament talks about hating the sin rather than the sinner, and I dont feel like that was really expressed in this article. Overall, I feel like your piece was inaccurate, not very well written, and represented the Christian world view poorly.
Noah Corbitt • Apr 24, 2014 at 9:45 am
OK. Let me first start off by saying that everyone is entitled to their own interpretation of arguments made. However, just because one perceives something in a certain way(like Bible verses) does not mean that that is the correct way. The Bible and many other books are written in ways that are up for interpretation, and seeing all of these comments bashing someone by citing verses that are really just their own personal interpretations is not fair to the negative side. When this happens, you are forcing someone to debate on your perception of the verse that is not necessarily the intended meaning. The Bible is filled with metaphorical language, and it is also spilt into Jewish law(Old Testament, pre-resurection), and Jesus’s teachings (New Testament, after the grace of the resurrection). This is why, for example, Christians do not have to make sacrifices according to Levitican law. Sacrifices and dietary restrictions were symbolic measures to ask repentance for sin and stay clean. Now, after-resurection, Jesus’s death on the cross after living a perfect life teaches that the debt for sin is paid and that those who believe and accept this gift of grace may have eternal life in heaven. There is no longer a need for sacrifices, and Christian faith teaches that Jesus cleans our sin, not avoiding certain animals. Therefore, to cite verses about shellfish and modern clothing are accusations taken without context.
Meanwhile, verses such as 1 Peter 2:18 and Ephesians 5:22 have different meanings than simply the literal interpretation. God is just, according to Christian faith, and therefore, if one was bonded into legal slavery (a common judiciary punishment for a crime at the time) you were to obey your master because that was your just punishment. Even today, we uphold judiciary sentencing. In other words, “If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.” The verse advocates compassion and discipline, not illegal slavery under the modern perception. As for Ephesians 5:22, this does not necessarily get interpreted as female inferiority. Marriage is a powerful bond, and one that is rather important to a relationship. Unfortunately, husbands and wives both often do horrible things to one another to secure the upper hand of power. The verse is talking specifically to wives, reminding them that power isn’t everything. As a God of moral perfection, God would not advocate for sin, and so therefore the verse is NOT saying that husbands may do whatever they please with their wives. Instead, it advocates to a sense of comradery, for it is to meant to be taken in the context of, “If wives, must submit, husbands must dominate.” Instead think of it as a private message to all wives calling for “Listen to your spouse so that in times of good and bad you may know peace with each other. Again, the verse is not granting permission for men to objectify or assault women. If some comments are going to give one interpretation, it is only fair that counter-interperetations be offered from the historical and religious context.
Don’t get me wrong. I don’t feel like censorship is the way to handle this issue and at the end of the day, people should be able to choose their sexual orientation without fear of legal repercussions. However, those of us who believe that to be gay is morally unethical should be allowed to speak our opinions as well. This is a very sensitive issue, and it takes a mature mindset to discuss it in a civilized manner. The argument of the negative side is that Disney Channel does not have the appropriate audience for discussion, not that gay people don’t exist. Of course the issue needs to be discussed. It is dividing society. However, Disney Channel is watched primarily by preschoolers and elementary schoolers (you know, before kids decide that they want mature shows). These are children whose minds’ are developing and who cannot comprehend the severity or reasoning behind certain issues. There are certain topics (ethnic cleansing, racism, sex, gender orientation, etc.) that can only be truly understood when someone is old enough and has enough real-life experience to lose childhood innocence. It is not that the issue should be censored, it is that true positions and clarity can only come when children can answer questions such as “Why are people gay?” or “How important is freedom?” Even if it is brought p and explained, little children do not always understand why things are as they are, and exposure too early ca skew their perceptions of key issues. That is the argument, not that gayness should be censored.
We can believe that something is wrong without persecuting those that do it.
Olivia Griffin • Apr 23, 2014 at 2:42 pm
Also…Obama has actually said that personally and as a Christian, he doesn’t agree with gay marriage, but he is still leading the campaign for gay marriage because he believes in equal rights and treatment for all.
Olivia Griffin • Apr 23, 2014 at 2:05 pm
First of all, congratulations to both of you on both of your articles. Well done. It takes courage to stand up and say what you believe, and make yourself vulnerable to the differing opinions of others. I may not agree with some of the opinions, but I respect that you are so bold with your beliefs.
Gay marriage should not be illegal. It appears that the bulk of the argument against gay marriage is based on the fact that it goes agains the teachings of the Christian church. However, we are not a theocracy, and we are based on the First Amendment principle that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging freedom of speech.” Making gay marriage legal would ensure that our nation is not religiously biased either way, and that our culture does not end up ethnocentric (some anthropologists have studied cultures such as the Etoro in southern New Guinea who believe that homosexual acts are sacred and bring forth healthy crops). Also, free speech means that we have freedom of expression, and, in some respects, you could say that marriage is a form of expression and speech, and that people have the right to marry whomever they please, because they have that freedom to express themselves. Additionally, doesn’t Disney deserve the right of free speech and expression rather than censorship? A person has the right to determine their own personal values and sense of morality and how they will conduct their life.
The decision whether or not to engage in homosexual activity is a right that every person should have – no government should interfere and tell people what they can and cannot do, and what their morals should be. Forcing all individuals to conform to the belief that marriage only exists between a man and a woman is, in some ways, like having a government force religion on them.
Emily Forrest • Apr 23, 2014 at 1:37 pm
“I get offended when people try to push their own beliefs on me.” This statement is extraordinarily hypocritical because you’re imposing your own beliefs on other people. How do you think gay people feel when you’re trying to shove it down their throats that loving the same sex is wrong? They cannot help who they love and the fact that you’re saying their love is wrong is not for you to judge.
“When people make their same sex relationship public it’s uncomfortable for me, it’s not the way it’s supposed to be, and in some states, “cough cough 33”, it’s banned.” If I see couples in the hallway at school showing PDA, it makes me uncomfortable, no matter who it is. But I’m not going to go up to them and tell them to stop, I’m going to just look the other way and ignore it. It’s called staying out of someone’s business.
Underage people go out and smoke, drink, and have sex all the time and yet they’re the ones who determine that gays that are happy together are the ones that are wrong.
Religion has nothing to do with gays having the right to be together. Say I’m gay and I’m atheist: why should I have to follow that belief system if I don’t believe in the bible? There are plenty of “sins” in the bible. You have no right to pick and choose the ones you think everyone should follow.
If two people are happy together, no matter their genders, why would you want to interfere and separate them? What makes you think you have the right to deny someone’s happiness?
Heidi Zettl • Apr 23, 2014 at 12:45 pm
Homosexuality has a psychological or developmental origin, though many people don’t believe so. There are actual differences in the brains of homosexuals that cause them to feel certain things and behave in certain ways. Homosexuality was treated as a mental disorder at one point; thankfully it isn’t anymore, but people should continue studying what causes it in order to better understand it. We should understand what is happening before we criticize. There is no need to hate homosexuals, it is not their fault. It is different to simply disagree, and that can be justified by belief systems. But I also believe that we should come to further understand the causes of homosexuality and the effects it has on people, their families, and their communities before we can make an educated decision on whether or not it should be legal. Also, like illegalizing alcohol (remember that from history class?), making same-sex marriage illegal may not, and so far has not been able to, stop it. Research, then decide your opinion; there are justifications for both sides of this issue.
Jillian Sanders • Apr 23, 2014 at 12:08 pm
The thing is, there’s always going to be two sides on this topic. Personally, I think Darby and Amy both have their points, however Darby is going a little bit extreme. Gay people are people, and while their beliefs may not be agreeable, us teens as the future have to be accepting of everyone. In the years to come, this disrespect to gay people may be seen as how our grandparents were with African Americans in the 1950’s. I am a christian, but that doesn’t entitle me to judge other sinners. All sins are equal, and judging gay people is just as bad as being gay in God’s eyes.
Grace Kuang • Apr 23, 2014 at 9:49 am
Say what you want, but please remember to talk about the subject and not people.
Learned from my mistake.
Jared Cooper • Apr 23, 2014 at 9:23 am
I am also a Christian man, however, I have a different opinion on gay marriage. While I do agree that it’s not what the Lord intended, it doesn’t mean that if someone is gay that they will be condemned to Hell. One of the beliefs that I have as a Christian is that whenever we mess up, no matter how bad, if we ask the Lord for forgiveness, then He will. Many believe that even a person who committed murder or any other heinous crime and is truly sorry for what they have done, then God will forgive them, so why is that people believe that being gay means you go to Hell. It doesn’t make since that murder is a forgivable act while gay love is unforgivable even though murder is so much more horrible. Just think about it, can you really picture God saying “Sorry, but you loved the wrong person” while he stands with murderers and people who have committed worse sins. I sure can’t.
Drew Carson • Apr 22, 2014 at 11:56 pm
I am sorry Darby, but I fail to see your argument. It’s hard to take you seriously when one of your first statements is that you do not care what others believe as long as those beliefs are not forced upon yourself, and then you advocate for the systematic oppression of others because you believe their actions are immoral. The reasoning doesn’t stand.
Most recent polls suggest that in the state of Texas about sixty percent of people support some kind of same-sex union. The Disney Channel is a private organisation, and so they have a right to abide by their own set of morals and values. Broadcasting a television show with two lesbian mothers is a decision on Disney’s part similar to Chic-fil-A’s decision to close on Sundays. If you do not agree with it, don’t watch the Disney Channel.
Lastly, Leviticus is one of the weakest parts of the bible to quote. Claiming validity in one section of Leviticus claims validity in the entire book, a book that among other things says it is sin to eat shellfish (11:10-12), eat pork and play football (11:4-7), have a round haircut (19:27), and wear most modern clothing (19:19). According to the Christian faith, all sins are equal. Eating bacon is just as sinful as having same-sex sexual intercourse. You do not have the right to determine which sins we should regulate and which sins we should not just because some make you uncomfortable.
King James I (the King who ordered the first and most popular English translation of the bible) is widely considered by historians to be a homosexual himself
Doug Laman • Apr 21, 2014 at 4:15 pm
“I am a Christian, I believe in following God’s word, and I will stand by that. With that being said, I get offended when people try to push their own beliefs on me. I don’t care what they might believe when those beliefs are kept silent, but when they make it public and try and change my beliefs I have to speak out against it.”
I hardly think a Disney Channel episode that features a gay couple is forcing beliefs on someone. And since other bible verses promote slavery (“Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel.” (1 Peter 2:18) and sexism (“Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.” (Ephesians 5:22), does that mean you’ll promote those two tactis? No? Yet you still manage to be anti-gay rights, despite it having no impact on you whatsoever….
Sheltering kids from the world isn’t going to make them better. Some of my favorite shows when I was a kid (and as an adult!) were shows like Rockos Modern Life and SpongeBob, where subliminal adult message laid hidden. As long as it doesn’t overwhelming the story itself, I implore more companies actually to do programs involving gay couples and other so callled “controversial” material.