Perspectives

Perspectives 

To understand both sides of controversial discussions, we decided to think for ourselves the perspectives people with differing opinions have. 

*These are not direct quotes, this is a role playing exercise.

Same sex marriage in japan

for:

       1.  There is no indication that same-sex marriage is against the law.

       2.  "We have the right to live equally, but we're currently living in a reality where that isn't the case."

            [Theresa Sakata (TS), advocate for same-sex marriage]

against: 

1. Allowing same-sex marriage would break tradition and the constitution

2. The original reasoning for marriage is to bear children and maintain a societal structure.

3. Allowing same sex marriage would worsen the declining rate of childbirth in japan

[Hase Hiroshi (HH), a member of the house of representatives]

[roleplay]

TS: Neither the law or the constitution indicates that same-sex marriage is disallowed. In actuality, the 24th article of the constitution states that everyone should be able to marry whomever they want.

HH: Although it states that everyone should have the right to marry whomever, it also says that a marriage should be between a man and a woman.

TS: Why should it only between a man and a women? Why can't we all have the right to live freely?

HH: Marriage has traditionally been to bare a child. With Japan's low rate of childbirth, we should, from a political standpoint, focus on doing as much as we can to increase childbirth rate therefore not legalizing same-sex marriage.

Don’t say gay bill

for:

1. “And we're going to make sure that parents are able to send their kid to kindergarten without having some of this stuff injected into their school curriculum”

2. we should allow for parents to know what kind of education and services children are getting in schools.

[Ron Desantis (RD), flo governor]

against:

  1. The bill is dangerous, a hateful legislation that poses many risks to LGBTQ youth in the state.

2. "The vagueness of the language in this bill opens an unfortunate door into allowing bigotry to continue"

[Clinton McCracken (CM), art teacher in Orange County, Florida]

        [roleplay] RD: This bill will make sure parents have more control over the education their own childrens will have. Parents have responsibility to raise their children and education is a fundamental core of the children's growing up. CM: This bill is a hateful legislation that specifically targets LGBT youth. Parents should have a say but that doesn't mean schools and the state should have the power to control the mind and body of children. RD: There's nothing hateful about a bill that lets parents know what's going on in school. CM: If the bill were actually simply for communication, it should be more specific. The legislation is extremely vague when there's no reason for it to be so.

Changing the constitution 

for:

1. It's an unjust discrimination

2. The constitution is dated, where only heterosexuals are, by law, allowed to get married. Doesn't make any sense, and it violates human rights.

[Theresa Sakata (TS), Japanese citizen unable to marry partner]

against:

1. The constitution is the rule that the country has to follow. changing one constitution can do irreversible damage and have a snowball effect. 

2. Most people don’t think that it's “necessary” 

[Hase Hiroshi (HH), gov. Ishikawa Prefecture]

        [roleplay] TS: The fact that the constitution can't be changed is unjust discrimination. HH: It's unfortunate but it's simply a rule of thumb. The constitution is the one rule that everyone has to follow and it won't be right to change it. TS: I understand that the constitution is a long held rule. However, it's an outdated rule where only heterosexuals are allowed marriage. It violates human rights. HH: If we change the constitution for the minority of people, we may have a snowball effect that will affect changes for article 9 as well.