I’ve gotten used to it now — peers voting down my right to get married, whether through state-level Defense of Marriage Acts, California’s Prop 8, or yesterday’s vote in Maine.
Put my marriage rights on a ballot, and I just expect to see them evaporate overnight. Poof!
What I haven’t figured out is how to feel about the people who cast those votes. Sometimes, I get lost in anger, but, eventually, I just sigh and move on — focusing on my own family, the well-being of my partner, our child and myself.
Still, I read a lot of literature produced by the Right and the Left about marriage and gay people. Both sides, it seem, have an interest in the same higher purpose: supporting healthy families. What differs, of course, is the definition of “family.” The Right supports tradition — traditional definitions of family (one man, one woman, for the ultimate purpose of child-bearing and child-nurturing); the Left wants change (a family of two adults, with or without an emphasis on child-bearing and child-nurturing).
I understand — and agree with — some of the Right’s view. I’m not supportive of “change” being taken too far. Adults should not marry children, or animals, as some far-Right advocates like to forewarn. Further, I have no interest in diluting the viability or vitality of opposite-sex families — I grew up in one. My Mom and my Dad are great people, and I am fortunate to have been nurtured by their love and care. Indeed, they taught me how to be a parent. I agree that our democracy needs to support “straight” families.
Yet the question before us need not be the either/or question of “Should we support straight families or gay families?” Our democracy can support both. Indeed, both kinds of families already live here.
My family is a family, albeit an untraditional one. We share a home, read bedtime stories, do laundry, eat meals at the dinner table, pay our bills and our taxes, fuss over chores, argue over homework, volunteer at school. We do the same things other families with children do — but we are not legally recognized. This reality necessarily places us on less firm ground than our heterosexual peers.
My family, especially our child, deserves equal access to the legal and social stability that civil marriage bestows on straight couples every single day. And it would benefit all of us — gay, straight and in between — to remember that marriage isn’t just about rights, it’s also about the responsibilities we have to one another.
Printer-friendly version
Comments
Interesting that the religion
Interesting that the religion question gets sidestepped here. How do you suggest religious "tolerance" be practiced in this context? In forcing others to accept gay marriage, aren't some religious views disrespected?
Marriage is not a religious
Marriage is not a religious institution. It is a governmental institution. Churches, temples, and other religious congregations are NOT required to perform any marriages to ANY couple. This is about the right to get married in the eyes of the government not in the eyes of a religion. I don't see why this is an issue.
Abby, I keep hearing this
Abby,
I keep hearing this "forced to accept" thing, and I just don't get it. I don't see how Jennifer's marriage -- or anybody else's -- is forcing me to do things any differently than I used to do. My marriage is my business; her marriage is her business.
I also really do not understand the idea that religious views are "disrespected" when gay marriages take place.
First of all, there are plenty of people of faith who support marriage equality. Second, I don't see how a wedding ceremony performed in SOMEONE ELSE'S church can be an act of disrespect for MY OWN church.
You can try all you want to argue that LGBT marriage involves some kind of insult or coercion. In fact, the opposite is true. LGBT people spend quite a lot of time tactfully navigating their relationships with hetero friends and family members. They have had to struggle just for the chance to get to the altar. When they get there, it's really hard to see how anything changes for anyone else who's already in a marriage.
It is astonishing to me when
It is astonishing to me when people assert that marriage has nothing to do with religion. Marriage supports purity and Godliness!
Moreover, our country embraces marriage *because* it's a Judeo-Christian nation. That's our history. We weren't founded by Buddhists and Hindus. We were founded by Christians. A diverse group of them, sure, but Christians nonetheless.
if we as a nation start to embrace the notion that all families (or marriages) are the same, we abandon a simple truth. The "traditional family" is the basis of our entire society -- all societies really. Although gays and lesbians have figured out ways to have children using "medicine" (some would say it's not natural or Godly, but I won't go there), procreation is necessary for any society's survival. Homosexuals can have all the babies they want, but the simple truth is that "straight" people will always have more. WE are the ones who populate a nation and keep it growing. Straight people.
As I mentioned in the
As I mentioned in the posting, I do believe our nation needs to support heterosexual families. I also agree that straight people will naturally have more children than gay or lesbian families -- there are more of you, and, I think, "straight culture," as it were, holds "procreation" as an expectation for married couples. The same is not true for many in the LGBT community.
Is there any place in this conversation where you might agree with me, or understand my point of view or lived experience? I'm not asking for a quid-pro-quo here. Just honestly, can you did down deep and try to put yourself in someone else's shoes? What would you want for your child, if you were me? There has to be SOME common ground we share.
"A diverse group of them,
"A diverse group of them, sure, but Christians nonetheless." Yes Abby, Christians are a diverse group. In fact some Christians churches not only accept marriage for all loving couples, but perform them for both different sex couples and same sex couples. Sounds like you are trying to force your religious beliefs on those churches such as the American Episcopal Church & the Unitarian Universalist Church who perform these marriages. You can appearantly quote what the conservative zealots spout, but seem to forget why those original "Judeo-Christians" immigrated to this country....for religious tolerance and equality for all people.
Actually, those original
Actually, those original immigrants of the 1600's did come here to escape religious persecution; however, they were followed by another lovely group of immigrants who also wanted to escape religious persecution but then decided that once they got here, they were "the right" religion and began to persecute others who were not like them. Compare William Brewster to the Puritans. They banished them from society, imprisoned them, tortured them, etc. A bunch of very nice, "Christian" people. One cannot use Christianity as a means of determining what is acceptable tolerance in society; now or historically.
The overall issue is gay people wanting legal rights. Rights to make decisions for one another, medical or legal. Rights to care for their children. Rights to inheritance. Rights of their children in case both partners perish. None of that really has much to do about religion. It comes down to actually voting yes to tolerance of those who may be different than ourselves. Sharing tradition in a non-traditional way. Not being selfish. People just cannot bring themselves to do it -- can they? Voting yes might mean they accept homosexuality, or that they might be themselves, or maybe they fear their employee benefits will be reduced if more families are on the plan because now we let "them" in on some benefits. The great oxymoron of our country; the great melting pot....
Abby and the rest of the
Abby and the rest of the bigots, hatemongers and prejudice people: the US belonged to the Native Americans before the Colonizers came and killed off most of us and stole our land. Indians, First Nations, Indigenous as we are called, had NO place in our communities for hatred as we accepted those individuals who were LGBT -right from when they displayed a talent for either the bow or the basket as children. Most of the Indian Nations had and still have a sacred place for our Gay,Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered individuals as the Creator did not make a mistake on creating ANYONE. We are Two Spirited and hold sacred roles in our society's since the beginning of time. Just remember, Homophobia is not indigenous to this continent -tolerance of diversity is. So after all of that, you and the Creator will be all that there is left in the end and for you and other people who wish to take rights away that you have NO RIGHT TO- Karma will come back on you..
Didn't Jesus say, do unto others as you would have them do unto you?? Funny how the religious right wing hate mongers forget that saying when they vote our rights away and get their little children to hold up signs saying "GOD hates Fags"! I feel real sad for your kids who will grow up in a home filled with hate!
No, because people can
No, because people can practice religions freely in this country. An individual can choose to not accept another person's religious beliefs, that is fine. You are not forced to accept Islam as the true religion and you are definately not forced to accept gay marriage. What you are not allowed to do is impede on others pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness which is what you are trying to accomplish.
I can see that this question
I can see that this question of religion would be reasonable if the law were saying that all people had to marry same-sex partners, disallowing traditional marriage. In fact, it's exactly the point though. Why should the religious right (or anyone else) get to force their view of marriage on those with another view?
As a man happily married to another man( it is legal elsewhere you know), I've yet to see one heterosexual marriage fall apart because of mine.
I am straight and a follower
I am straight and a follower of Jesus (I'd rather not use the term Christian for various reasons), and I only speak of my identity so to remind my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters that they do have "Christian straight" advocates, since too often the Christian voice for justice is too quiet. When speaking of religious tolerance, it is important to remember that advocating for marriage rights of homosexuals is not the same as being "forced to accept" something you do not believe or agree with. Though I have no issues with same-sex married couples (based on my views of God through the person of Jesus Christ), plenty of others do have a moral problem in accepting them. But again, that does not mean that that we should not all agree that in a democracy, mature adults cannot be allowed to choose whom to love and marry. Just as we must practice religious tolerance for those who worship God differently or choose not to worship God at all (we do not deny these people their basic human rights because their beliefs and actions differ from ours), so we must practice religious tolerance for those in same-sex relationships who wish to have the basic human right to get married. I am very sad to hear of Maine's outcome. May God be with all of the hurting families who are affected.
You know, I've been
You know, I've been struggling with how to accept another defeat and how to feel about those (some of whom are near and dear to me) that are comfortable voting away our civil rights... You show a strength of understanding here that is heartwarming. Your last line touched me, "marriage isn’t just about rights, it’s also about the responsibilities we have to one another." Someone recently reminded me that civil rights victories are, always, built on the foundation of all the defeats that came before them.
I have a solution for both
I have a solution for both the equal rights aspect and the religious. Make marriage a strictly religious institution. Take away all the tax benefits, the survivorship rights, the social security benefits, the dual insurance coverage, the ability to make decisions for your partner during medical emergencies, special parental rights, and all the other special rights granted to people that are married and everyone will be equal again. If you want to get married go right ahead, but know it is a religious institution only and you get no special rights.
Civil rights, and I do
Civil rights, and I do believe that two adults choosing to marry is a civil right, should not be put to a majority vote. We didn't allow states to put de-segregation decisions up for popular vote. We didn't decide the fate of so-called anti-miscegenation marriage laws by voter referendum. If we had done these things, we'd still be attending segregated schools and seeing states outlaw "mixed" marriages. I want my US government to do the right thing and protect the rights of GLBT individuals to marry. Gay marriage poses no threat to my straight marriage, and religion has no right to dictate civil rights. No more excuses.
One of the things I am
One of the things I am struggling with in the aftermath of this election is how to deal with a married friend, a professed "queer" and supporter of equal right, who didn't vote because she refuses to participate in what she views as a flawed system. I know how I feel about the folks who voted to repeal the law...but I'm not sure how to feel about this friend. Is it wrong to expect that supporters of equal rights--especially those who are already enjoying the rights and responsibilities of civil marriage (in my view, an endorsement of the flawed system)--would vote to uphold my right to marry my partner?
Would it make a difference if we had asked this friend to officiate our wedding/commitment ceremony?
As a straight man raised in a
As a straight man raised in a conservative Lutheran family with 5 children and 11 grandchildren, I am moved by the gentleness and clarity of your message. Your openness and support of my marriage, my children and my grandchildren is much appreciated. I believe this is a civil liberty issue and your civil liberties and those of your partner and daughter should be protected by all of us. I stand with you and your family on this one, Jennifer. I am grateful for your efforts for the civil liberties of your family because it is an effort for the civil liberties of all of us - including those who, at this point in time, do not see it as a civil liberties issue. Hang in there, Jennifer, you are not alone. Barry