Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
×
1500 Purchase Purchased Download Purchase Soon
1.4 MB ZIP File. Includes JPG, PSD
View Attachments
MarriagePropHQ.jpg
671 KB
MarriageProp.psd
1.3 MB
Add Your Rating! Thanks for Rating! Change Your Rating




Details

Submitted on
July 10, 2012
Image Size
119 KB
Resolution
600×800
Submitted with
Sta.sh
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
2,194
Favourites
208 (who?)
Comments
76
×
Marriage Equality (+ sta.sh download) by SgtSugar Marriage Equality (+ sta.sh download) by SgtSugar
Last semester my Digital Imaging professor gave us the assignment to create a Propaganda poster. It could be about whatever we like, from actual issues (politics, religion, economics, ect ect) to fictional issues (games, shows, books, ect ect) to things you think people should do with their cats. There was no limits, as long as it included text and images, and we used a few tools in photoshop.

Being the person I am, I chose Marriage Equality.

I worked very hard on this poster, and I am incredibly proud of it.

I wrote and rewrote the text on the image so many times I’ve forgotten exactly what it used to read. I wanted to make it short sweet and to the point:

“Hate and religion do not belong in our constitution.”

Now understand, “hate” and “religion” do NOT go hand in hand. I picked those words as the broad spectrum of what is keeping us from marriage equality because separately they are the two biggest factors.

To keep this short, as honestly I have no reason to explain myself to any of you about my choices but feel the need to do so anyway:

RELIGION, because one of the main reasons people in this country are against lgbtq+ marriage is because “the bible says it’s an abomination.” There are religious people who support lgbtq+ marriage and I really respect all of you for it, but there are a lot of people who are against it just because “God said so.” And to the people who are “for civil unions” but not “for lgbtq+ marriage”, you’re a joke. Don’t label our relationships as second-class and pretend we’re all equal.

HATE, because the other main reason people are against lgbtq+ marriage is because people just straight up hate the idea of it. It’s “unnatural”. It’s not “family friendly”. It’s not “the norm”. You can’t produce children so it’s not acceptable. It’s different, and people in this country hate different. And it’s very sad.

Whether Heterosexual or LGBTQ+, love is love. And everyone deserves the right to MARRIAGE. Not some Union/Partnership bullshit. We are not here for you to degrade us with your false equality.

Tl;dr One day, I will MARRY the person I love, whoever that person may be. And everyone who thinks that that is vile and foul and disgusting can go fuck themselves.

Thank you.

Enjoy my project. (I got 100% on it.)

--

This image is 2700 x 3600 (approx. 9in x 12in), with a ppi of 300. The files given are a HQ .jpg, as well as a FLATTENED .psd. This image was created solely by me and entirely in Photoshop CS5 and does not contain vectors.

Because I was dumb with my color profiling, any printing of this image may turn reds a little pinker than shown on your screen. (We printed them out in class and the reds ended up a little pink. It might have just been our printer, but I don't know.)

Feel free to note me with any questions pertaining to the image (i.e. it's creation process, and not it's idea) or the Seller Agreement at any time.

--
Image (c) :iconsgtsugar:
Add a Comment:
 
:icondportzegerman:
DPortZeGerman Featured By Owner 3 days ago
Hate and Religion doesn't belong in any Nation's laws.
Religion deserves to be Hated.
Religion's only purpose is to control people. The more you learn history, the clearer it becomes.
It's sad, when people are slaves to a government people react in rage, but when people are slaves to a „god“, it's somehow acceptable.
Religion is, and always will be a scam. It's a shame that earth's most intelligent species would imagine such things.
First, interreligious marriage was 
„untraditional“, then interracial, ow same-sex.
But the thing is, the concept of marriage predates Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and even Hinduism.
Marriage was never 
„traditional“ to any religion. It's a shame humanity fails as a thinking creature to realise this.
Reply
:iconthatfreakyzephyr:
ThatFreakyZephyr Featured By Owner 5 days ago  Hobbyist Digital Artist
guys, good news for the US:
The supreme court will try to rule for gay marriage nationwide. They recognize its unconstitutional to discriminate consenting adults from marriage. 
Whats even better is that they will refuse to let the republicans stop them. 
Reply
:icontheantsaboy94:
TheAntsaBoy94 Featured By Owner Nov 25, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
"Don't label our relationships as second-class and pretend we're all equal" Who says they're pretending? "Couple" refers to two persons, "relationship" describes a connection between two persons. It doesn't make you any lesser of a human being if you choose a partner with whom a relationship would not be any good. We all make mistakes.
Reply
:iconsgtsugar:
SgtSugar Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I'm afraid I don't understand what you're trying to tell me.

I'm specifically talking about people labeling LGBTQ+ relationships as lesser. Labeling same sex relationships, relationships involving transpersons, genderqueers and other nonbinaries, and asexuals as something lesser than marriage or, well, relationships. These people have been deemed "unworthy" of the label of marriage, despite the fact that we are in the same kinds of relationships and marriages as heterosexuals and cisgenders.

Are you trying to say that all LGBTQ+ relationships are between people who's relationships will never be any good?

Because I'm not talking about relationships that are between people who aren't compatible. I'm talking about normal, healthy relationships representing the LGBTQ+ community. Which are perfectly good. But are constantly put down as lesser and require a lesser, unequal title. My genderqueer girlfriend is not my "partner" by label, she is my girlfriend. and if I get married to her, we will not be in a "domestic partnership" or a "civil union", we will be married.
Reply
:icontheantsaboy94:
TheAntsaBoy94 Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
"These people have been deemed" again, this is not about individual people, but the kind relationship they're having. It is clear, that not every type of relationship has the same function nor serve the same purpose. Whereas individual differences can ruin an otherwise good relationship, it cannot justify a type of relationship, that is wrong from the begin with; human beings simply aren't meant to function in every way we want.
Reply
:iconsgtsugar:
SgtSugar Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
So basically you're saying humans can't function in relationships NOT between a man and a woman? That regardless of the individual, the relationship between those who aren't cisheteros is always doomed to fail simply because they aren't traditional, because they may not produce children, ect?

How sorely mistaken you are!
Reply
:icontheantsaboy94:
TheAntsaBoy94 Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Just because we're not meant to do so doesn't mean we couldn't do it at all. Otherwise, we could do no wrong.

Thus breaking up, or any other sort of hardship within a relationship, is not the only thing, that can be harmful. Merely being happy for the wrong reason is bad; the more one accepts twisted happiness, the less open he or she is for real happiness, the sort, that is actually good for a human being.
Reply
:iconlnmman:
LNMman Featured By Owner Aug 24, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Amen, brother!
Reply
:icondashinvaine:
dashinvaine Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2013
The most egregious example of propaganda is the 'liberal' Left's insistence on labelling disagreement as 'hate'. So there's 'fee speech' if you are on the politically correct side and 'hate speech' if you are dissenting. 

Everyone doesn't have the right to 'marriage'. You can't marry your mother or your brother or a horse or a football team. Men don't have the right or the power to get pregnant, either, so much for this ephemeral and elusive notion of 'equality'.

Reply
:iconbloodredfullmoon:
BloodRedFullMoon Featured By Owner Oct 27, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
That may well be so, and I always found the usage of the word "equality" in this context nonsensical (because strictly speaking, those couples are not "equal", just as men and women are not technically "equal").

Still, I don't think there is anything wrong with gays marrying, especially not in religious terms, because religion does not hold a monopoly on marriage. They did not invent it (however much they may claim that to be the case), it was a common practice long before even the earliest religions were formed. Therefore, religious opinion should not have any bearing on the matter, yet it does - especially in the US. If a church doesn't want to marry gays, that's up to them. Nobody is forcing them. But that's not what the whole deal is about, is it? It's about basic rights, specifically relating to romantic relationships, and in that sense, there can be no right or wrong with regard to gender. If two consenting adults love each other (close relatives excluded for obvious reasons - incest is another matter entirely), nobody has the right to deny them making vows of mutual commitment, and if certain rights and privileges come with those vows (which is the case in most countries), then they have the right to those as well.

Arguing that - were that permitted regardless of gender - it would lead to people marrying all sorts of things is a slippery slope fallacy. There is no logical reason why that would follow.

Personally, I believe that marriage should not be a legal matter nor a religious matter (unless the couple wishes it so), but simply a matter between two people, because let's be honest. Love does not require validation by a third party, whatever that party may be.

Call me liberal if you want (I'm not american, so I don't understand the negative connotations many of you seem to see in that word - if anything you should embrace it. Isn't liberty what you allegedly praise so much over there?). I support anyone's right to state their opinion. But I also see that anyone has a right to disagree with that opinion. And what the religious extremists especially in the US are doing with this debate (which should by all means be a non-issue) can certainly be seen as "hate". Not because they're not on the correct political side or whatever, but because what they're spewing is hate. Sure, they have the right to express that hate. But it's hate nevertheless.
Reply
:icondashinvaine:
dashinvaine Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2013
free speech*
Reply
:iconcerezith:
Cerezith Featured By Owner Jun 12, 2013
Everyone should decide for himself, what person I want to be with and what person I want to be in love with.
I think that modern, educated person should not listen to thoughts of ignorant people and should not obey to religious legacy of the middle ages.
I hope that someday we get our right to marry equally.
Reply
:iconswedishpichi:
SwedishPichi Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2012
If you want my honest opinion... I don't agree with this but oh well... :)
Reply
:iconeyes:
eyes Featured By Owner Oct 20, 2012
I don't understand how use of a noun in a context that it's never been applicable to equates to an equality issue.
Reply
:iconsmoothporcupine:
SmoothPorcupine Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2012
I agree with marriage equality.

Everyone should be equal, married or not.

Marriage has no place being a legal institution.

I don't care who you marry, so long as you don't get some stupid tax break for it.
Reply
:icondeidara-theterrorist:
Deidara-TheTerrorist Featured By Owner Sep 11, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Just to make people happy if I was president: I would let gays marry but call it something different. Problem solved.
Reply
:iconsgtsugar:
SgtSugar Featured By Owner Sep 11, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I wasn't aware that separation made it equal.
Reply
:icondeidara-theterrorist:
Deidara-TheTerrorist Featured By Owner Oct 10, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I don't want to try and destroy religion or gay freedom. It's like saying "I have one cup of sugar" and "I have 4 quarters of sugar" Same damn thing, just said different.
Reply
:iconsgtsugar:
SgtSugar Featured By Owner Oct 10, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Well I don't want to destroy anything, either. But religious practices (I.E. marriage being defined as a man and woman) should not be forced the whole population. It's not destroying anything, it's keeping Church and State separate, as it should be.
Reply
:icondeidara-theterrorist:
Deidara-TheTerrorist Featured By Owner Nov 5, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Which I completely understand. But keep in mind: Ameicans vote for these people.
Reply
:iconsgtsugar:
SgtSugar Featured By Owner Nov 5, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Any LGBTQ+ person would NOT vote for you because you want to create Civil Unions or Domestic Partnerships. We want the title of Marriage as well as the benefits, not some slipshod false equivalency. Marriage didn't start in Religion, it started in social trade contract, i.e. I'll give you seven fat pigs for your daughters hand. You're not protecting religion by keeping the word "marriage" associated to a man and a woman, you're only oppressing the LGBTQ+. The word "Marriage" has a social meaning and a social feel of acceptance, and LGBTQ+ deserve to have that. When you give them something else, it is by definition, DIFFERENT. It's NOT a marriage, it's a Civil Union. It's NOT a marriage, it's a Domestic Partnership. Both of which are for LGBTQ+ ONLY, and therefore have a NEGATIVE social meaning because it speaks that they aren't good enough for a "REAL" marriage. It's oppressive.

No LGBTQ+ person will vote for someone who doesn't support MARRIAGE. We're not settling for anything less.
Reply
:icondeidara-theterrorist:
Deidara-TheTerrorist Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I...didn't say anything about religion. I may be a christian but I really don't care if you get married. It's your business, not mine. I was just offering a suggestion if it didn't happen. And I never said "vote for me". I'm... not even American. I vote for the prime minister...
Reply
:icondubstepwraith:
DubstepWraith Featured By Owner Sep 6, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I fucking HATE the Bible and Christianity. Brainwashing pricks.
Reply
:iconsgtsugar:
SgtSugar Featured By Owner Sep 6, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I don't have a problem with Christianity until someone tries to force it on me.
Reply
:icondubstepwraith:
DubstepWraith Featured By Owner Sep 6, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I don't have anything against god, in fact, he's a really cool guy. Wants nothing but for everyone to be happy and at peace. It's his FANCLUBS that just piss me off.
Reply
:iconboeing767:
Boeing767 Featured By Owner Aug 7, 2012
Gay marriage is not allowed.
Reply
:iconpericarditis:
pericarditis Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
in some places it is
what do you think is wrong with it?
Reply
:iconboeing767:
Boeing767 Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2012
Everything. It's totally unnatural. Only traditional marriage is allowed.
Reply
:iconigelfullmetal:
IgelFullmetal Featured By Owner Nov 9, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Reply
:iconmangonigger:
MangoNigger Featured By Owner Sep 6, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
So a rapist marrying his victim- that was traditional marriage in the bible, you know.
Reply
:iconboeing767:
Boeing767 Featured By Owner Sep 6, 2012
I don't support that.
Reply
:iconmangonigger:
MangoNigger Featured By Owner Sep 6, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Well, you said, TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE.
Reply
:icongrievousfan:
grievousfan Featured By Owner Sep 6, 2012  Student General Artist
But according to the Bible that's traditional marriage! So is a man selling his daughter into marriage for goats and cows, and prisoners of war being forced to marry whichever soldier takes a liking to them.

TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE FTW :slow:
Reply
:iconboeing767:
Boeing767 Featured By Owner Sep 6, 2012
I only support marriage if it is between an adult male and an adult female.
Reply
:icongrievousfan:
grievousfan Featured By Owner Sep 6, 2012  Student General Artist
Female rape victims marrying their male rapists = Who says the women aren't adults?

Female prisoners of war being forced to marry male soldiers = Children and adult women whose husbands have been killed, or just adult women.
Reply
:iconcolbatros:
Colbatros Featured By Owner Sep 6, 2012  Student Writer
So blacks shouldn't be allowed to marry whites just because it used to be considered unnatural and wasn't part of 'traditional marriage'?
Reply
:iconsonic260:
Sonic260 Featured By Owner Sep 6, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Wouldn't the concept of marriage in general be unnatural since it was something people made up?
Reply
:iconvxyxv:
VXYXV Featured By Owner Sep 5, 2012
You want to know what else is unnatural? Cars, clothes, homes, concentrated food products and the internet. Want more examples for your shitty argument?
Reply
:iconpericarditis:
pericarditis Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
and what is your proof that it is unnatural if other species practice homosexuality too?
Reply
:iconr00-ha-ha:
R00-ha-ha Featured By Owner Aug 12, 2012  Student General Artist
Says who?
Reply
:iconthewickedkid:
TheWickedKid Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2012  Hobbyist Artist
Also:

My friend found a loophole in that line anyways. It says A) a man and a man and B) a man shouldn't lay with a man as he would lay with a woman.

It says nothing about lesbianism.
A gay man wouldn't lay with a man as he would lay with a woman.
Reply
:iconsgtsugar:
SgtSugar Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Yeah, but even then that interpretation only technically supports Gays and Lesbians, and not the rest of the lgbtq+ community. :/ Erferf.
Reply
:iconthewickedkid:
TheWickedKid Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2012  Hobbyist Artist
Bible says nothing about crossdressing or being effeminate/masculine. Everyone wore skirts in those days anyways.

As for Bi...my friend later said it probably meant no threesomes. Lulz.
Reply
:iconsgtsugar:
SgtSugar Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
well crossdressing or being effeminate/masculine is different than being Bi or Pan or Trans or Genderqueer or anything else in the LGBTQ+ spectrum :P You can be straight and be a crossdresser, just as you can be straight be be effeminate or masculine.

And the Bible has it's own stuff about Monogamy too so xP
Reply
:iconthewickedkid:
TheWickedKid Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2012  Hobbyist Artist
I say that because the term probably didn't exist back then. So it would be in regards to men being effeminate or women being masculine.
Reply
:iconthewickedkid:
TheWickedKid Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2012  Hobbyist Artist
One state actually defined marriage as between a man and a woman and because they did that it completely removed civil unions. For everyone. Not. Good.
Reply
:iconstrawberryr:
StrawberryR Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
What if there's "religious" people (people of faith) who like/are LGBTQ? Like the ones at :iconlgbt-christians:?
Reply
:iconsgtsugar:
SgtSugar Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
As written in my explanation in the Artist Comments, "There are religious people who support lgbtq+ marriage and I really respect all of you for it."

This poster is specifically referring to people of faith who don't support lgbtq+ marriage for the sole reason that "God says so", no ifs ands or buts. So those people of faith who support lgbtq+ aren't in that category of people.

(Also the poster itself is mostly restating that Church and Sate are separate so religion shouldn't be an issue when it comes to who can marry.)
Reply
:icontirah:
Tirah Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2012
I'm sure he's talking about the Bible-thumping radical Christians, not the cool ones. :)
Reply
:iconwhite-mage-cid:
White-Mage-Cid Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2012
I'm bisexual and I fully support LGBTQ
Reply
Add a Comment: