I have never really been a fan of Elton John. Some of his older music is decent but overall his sound has not struck a chord with me. Add to that the crazy fashion sense and it was secured that I would not be a fan. He has done duets and accompaniments with every one from Eminem to Leann Rimes. A few years ago when I heard about another group featuring Mr. John I joked that he was going to soon work with Alice in Chains, which has now happened.
Mr. John recently stated that he thinks Proposition 8 in California was asking too much:
“I don’t want to be married. I’m very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership. The word ‘marriage,’ I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships.”
Many people who are ignorant to the real situation behind Proposition 8 think that by having it passed that homosexual people were denied equal treatment with heterosexual people. This could not be further from the truth. Homosexual people already have the ability to form domestic partnerships in California which allow them the same treatment by government as married people. So what was lost with Proposition 8? The word ‘marriage’ was the only thing on the table. If marriage were to be declared a civil right then religious institutions would have been forced to participate in activities that go against their beliefs because otherwise they are denying someone their civil right. That is a clear violation of the first amendment which we could discuss in greater detail later. The battle over the word ‘marriage’ is as silly, to me, as battling over the word ‘heterosexual’. It has a clear definition and origin as being between a man and woman. Where, in principle, procreation is impossible, marriage is also impossible. I always imagine homosexuals protesting the fact that they are not referred to as ‘heterosexual’.
There are two more important issues than the definition of the word, which underlie this issue. First is the issue of government treating people in different circumstances differently. All citizens in good standing should be treated equally in the eyes of the government. Allowing married couples to have tax breaks and other benefits while denying them to others is wrong. This line of thinking should be extended beyond just people who have a sexual partner, over to single people as well. It is unjust discrimination to charge single people at a higher tax rate because they are loners, picky or ugly. The government began treating married couples in such a way because nuclear families are good for society, which leads me to the second underlying issue. Marriage and families are essential to having a thriving, civilized society. Although redefining ‘marriage’ would distort it’s importance, there are much bigger problems to worry about in regards to marriage such as improper treatment of spouses and children and divorce. I have a special disdain in my heart for abuse of children and women. Disloyalty to family and breaking of vows is another despicable act that has a negative effect on society. Failures in marriage and family pose a much more dire threat to society than the definition of words.
Sir Elton John is reasonable and classy in his view on the word ‘marriage’. He is also correct that he has the freedom to choose how to live his own life and has the right to equal treatment under the government. Once again by butting in where it didn’t belong government has created more problems. This issue has served to distract and promote disunity amongst people who should all be concerned and fighting for individual freedoms and keeping government limited.
