On Nov. 18, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the prohibition against civil marriages for same-sex couples violates the Massachusetts Constitution. As Chief Justice Margaret Marshall stated in her ruling, "The Massachusetts Constitution affirms the dignity and equality of all individuals. It forbids the creation of second-class citizens." She said the government had failed to identify any reason for denying civil marriage to homosexual couples.
The ruling was yet another milestone for the homosexual cause in the US. In response, however, US President George W. Bush commented during his visit to London that "marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman," and he felt that the ruling violated this principle. He vowed to work with the US Congress to "defend the sanctity of marriage."
I believe that Bush's remarks were not only inappropriate but also senseless. As the head of the world's superpower, he should never let his religious beliefs interfere with the judicial system. Besides, what is the definition of "sanctity" anyway? The sanctity of marriage lies in loving and cherishing another human being. It's sacred because of the holiness of love, not a person's gender.
By sacrificing certain people's rights in order to protect his personal beliefs, Bush has brought his country back to a time when black people were enslaved and when women were not allowed to vote. Not to mention that the "sacred institution" between heterosexuals doesn't look so sacred in view of the fact that the US has the highest divorce rate in the world.
As times change, perhaps conservatives should also change their minds to keep up with trends. For example, the Episco-pal Church consecrated its first openly gay bishop early this month. This served as a very good start. Unfortunately, church conservatives are warning that the consecration could have destroyed people's faith in the church.
In fact, these people should not worry about a thing if their faith in God is strong enough. They have to realize that people hold different religious, moral and ethical convictions about homosexuality, and that the key to the problem often lies in how they read the Bible, and how they truly understand God's words.
I am particularly impressed by the ruling, which stressed that the purpose of marriage is "the commitment of the marriage partners to one another, not the begetting of children." Conservatives claim that the purpose of getting married is to raise children. If that is the case, should women who do not or cannot give birth be barred from marrying?
As for same-sex couples with children, the ruling will not only protect their rights but also those of their children. As the ruling pointed out, homosexual parents have no access to civil marriage and its protection because they are unable to procure a marriage license.
"It cannot be rational under our laws, and indeed it is not permitted, to penalize children by depriving them of state benefits because the state disapproves of their parents' sexual orientation," the ruling said.
Looking back at Taiwan situation, President Chen Shui-bian (
Meanwhile, the opposition camp has also vowed to further protect and promote gay rights in Taiwan. It's certainly hoped that our politicians will not only talk the talk but also walk the walk.
Chang Sheng-en is a lecturer of English at Shih Chien University and National Taipei College of Business.
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.