Together
No "Gay Marriage," Just "Marriage"
Ah, marriage. It’s the popping of the question, the walk down the aisle and the commitment to a beloved partner until one of you dies – preferably not at the hand of the other.
OK, cheap shot. That’s because it’s easy for straight people to be cavalier about marriage. We have decades of mother-in-law jokes as part of our shared history, not to mention resentment-building fights about children, money, sex and so much more. We take marriage for granted. Many who have "served time" with "the old ball and chain" have come to reject marriage – until the next opportunity comes around. It’s surprisingly irresistible.
Or maybe not so surprising. The fact is that a marriage makes two unrelated people a family, with all the rights and responsibilities that implies. Other than adoption, marriage is the only way to become part of someone else’s family, to completely legalize a union based on love.Marriage is the ultimate partnership. It’s a public pronouncement that you’re off the market, that you are loved by and love another in a profound way. It’s a legal pact giving each of you rights to share in the other’s assets (pre-nups notwithstanding).
So why should some loving couples not be permitted to marry?
In 2000, by a 61% margin, Californians passed Proposition 22 which defined marriage as between one man and one woman. Gay couples? Not eligible. But on May 15, 2008 the California Supreme Court struck down that ban on same-sex marriages because it discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation. The court ruled that all couples should indeed be allowed to take the marital leap.
Couples immediately began filing for licenses (listing "Party A" and "Party B" instead of "Bride" and "Groom") and marriages began at 5:01pm on June 17th, 2008. We'll see how long it lasts: a group pushing for a state constitutional ban on gay marriage has a measure on the November ballot defining marriage as between a man and a woman. (Forty-four states already have legal barriers to gay marriage, either a law or constitutional amendment.) Longer-term challenges are even more daunting, including a likely Supreme Court hearing that tests the constitutionality of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.
There’s a lot of anger about gay marriage among a vocal and active group that so far has defied a catchy name. Straights Rights Activists? Family Defenders? Surely they’ll come up with something as they gather their million-plus petition signatures and put together their campaign to deny gay couples the right to marry.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a group lobbying for a “Marriage Protection Amendment” to the U.S. Constitution, said in a press release for his organization, "This decision [by the California Supreme Court] put marriage at risk all across the nation.”
Yes, the main argument against gay marriage has been that it endangers "real" marriage by devaluing the institution. Really? More than, say, a 50% divorce rate among straight couples? More than fascination with quickie celebrity marriages that seem based more on boosting box office than committing to a life together? More than the astronomical rise in out-of-wedlock births?
If a wedding cake with two grooms - or two brides - seems shocking, it shouldn’t. And it won’t for much longer. Society has come to accept interracial marriage, once illegal and the object of just as much vitriol as same-sex marriage is among groups like the Family Research Council.
We don’t get to choose our sexual orientation. Or our racial or ethnic makeup. And being in the majority doesn’t bestow the right to make decisions for everyone. In fact, the majority has an obligation to the minority to recognize that they have the same standing in the human race, the same wants, needs and rights. To work actively to deny those rights isn’t just discriminatory. It’s not just unacceptable. It's immoral and intolerable.
by Laura
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
