Allowed to exist (John Eichelberger)

20 June 2009

Video | ZJ on YouTube | Subscribe

ZJ: Last month, Pennsylvania State Senator John Eichelberger introduced a bill to amend the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage. Although Pennsylvania already has a statute banning same-sex marriage, Eichelberger believes a constitutional amendment could prevent this law from being overturned as unconstitutional.

Around the same time, Senator Daylin Leach introduced a bill to legalize same-sex marriage. On Friday, Eichelberger and Leach went on WHYY's Radio Times show to debate whether same-sex marriage should be legal. Here are a few notable excerpts:

Daylin Leach: How would he want to encourage stability in gay couples?

John Eichelberger: I wouldn't. I mean, they can practice whatever sexual activity they like to practice, but there's no reason to give them special consideration. We don't give them special consideration in Pennsylvania for any reason. Why in the world would we allow them to marry?

[...]

Leach: How would you encourage gay couples to be able to provide for their families?

Eichelberger: Well, I wouldn't.

Leach: What do you expect of them?

Eichelberger: There's no reason to encourage that kind of behavior in Pennsylvania.

[...]

Eichelberger: That comes back, though, to the definition of family, and that's where we differ. I mean, you can call it a family. And we can call all sorts of things families. I mean, we can say that a three-party marriage is a family, or 7 or 8 people, or marrying younger and younger children these days.

[...]

Host: But are you saying, Senator Eichelberger, that by their very nature, homosexual relationships are dysfunctional?

Eichelberger: Um, yes, I guess I would say that. I would say that.

[...]

Leach: Should our only policy towards those couples be one of punishment, to somehow prove to them that they've done something wrong, or should we help them live their lives?

Eichelberger: They're not being punished. We're allowing them to exist, and do whatever every American can do. We're just not rewarding them with any special designation.

ZJ: You're allowing us to exist. Wow, that's so reassuring! Good to know we have your permission to exist. As if you have a choice in the matter.

I have to wonder, does he know what it's like to be called "dysfunctional" for loving another person? To have your relationship compared to pedophilia, and treated as a "behavior" that should not be "encouraged"? And after all that, to be told by a government official that they're "allowing you to exist"? As if the only thing your government will do for you is refrain from killing you?

I don't think Mr. Eichelberger knows what that's like. If he did, maybe he wouldn't be so utterly devoid of the most basic human decency as to say that we are merely "allowed" to exist. Nobody is "allowed" to exist. We have a right to exist, and our existence is not subject to anyone's approval. And we're going to keep existing regardless of what Mr. Eichelberger has to say about it.

And we're not going to settle for simply being allowed to exist. Our equality will be recognized under the law. And marriage will no longer be a "special designation" exclusive to heterosexuals. And we're not going to put up with baseless comparisons from alarmist idiots like Mr. Eichelberger. A woman loves a man, and you say they deserve the "special designation" of marriage. But a man loves a man, and you say that's like pedophilia? Do you even think about this, or is that just not an activity you like to practice?

You are the last person to be calling anyone "dysfunctional". We don't need to hear about what's "dysfunctional" from someone who hates love, and loves hate.

But at least you have the courtesy to allow us to exist. Thank you so much, Mr. Eichelberger. You pathetic, ignorant fascist.

← Video archive