I think it’s funny that people say they are in support of the institution of marriage by saying they “believe in marriage”.
Are these the same people who then also believe in the Easter Bunny, The tooth Fairy and dear old Saint Nick?
Using the word believe to say you support marriage gives a bizarre understanding to the concept of support.
The opposite of believing in marriage would therefore be not believing in it’s existence, like those of us who no longer believe in the big bun, or our beloved magical dental collector.
Why use the word believe is what I want to know, it makes everything so ineffable, flimsy and intangible, which, is cool for me,because , on the whole, I don’t “believe” in it, but I do know it exists. It’s almost like if enough people say they believe in marriage than it will really exist, and even the “non-believers” will be able to see it, much like the illusive unicorn; it shows its self only to those who truly believe in it with their full heart.
So, is the institution of marriage therefore an illusive unicorn; so intangible that even people who believe in it’s value see that it’s still so controversial and misogynist that in order to support it it’s important to use will power, to believe in it to make it more lasting and real?
I don’t know, but I do think it’s odd. Why not say you agree with the institution or are in favour of it, but not believe in.
In other news, the other day in NY the first ever Animal Rights Day event was held. Pretty wicked. Speaking of animal rights and wicked things, here is a link which was sent to me by another blogger( I was about to use the word fellow, to mean another, but, then I stopped myself and realized how inherently sexist that word is) about the harm that is done to horses that are made to pull carriages in cities. We think it’s so romantic, they go blind.
And, as usual, here is my link to my 2 in one petition; it’s to protest Go Daddy and then there’s a link to my other Animal Rights petition within.