The constitutional amendment debate has hit me hard, delivering a sucker punch that's left me reeling. I feel sick, sad and disgusted that the argument would even receive enough legitimacy to be discussed at a national level.
How, precisely, are we protecting marriage by saving it for the Britney Spears and Bill Clintons of the world? Divorce rates are through the roof, starter marriages have become a cultural phenomenon, and no one I know is getting hitched for the sake of procreation--even though it's being defined as the purpose of matrimony by some in the religious right.
After all, marriage should not be a means to an end (children), but a gift unto itself.
As a straight woman, I could technically get married anytime I feel like it. I can visit the courthouse with the man of my dreams, or I can pick the Joe I met last week who's kinda hot and who would be fun for a year or two. How is that any more palatable to you than a pair of women who have been faithful for decades? When I hear about a couple getting married after 51 years of fidelity, my heart sings. They are role models to me; their sexual identities should not detract from the shining example of devotion they embody.
And how hypocritical of conservatives to scream that the government better "stay out of my life!" when it comes to guns, taxes, the environment, education, retirement funds...anything, apparently, except issues that conflict with their unique moral perspectives.
Judges aren't activists when they try to post the 10 commandments on their front lawn, or when they work to overturn Roe v. Wade, but heaven forbid they make the perfectly logical argument that "separate but equal" is nothing more than discrimination masquerading behind a veil of semantics! If civil unions were really equal, we should junk "marriage" altogether and let the former term cover everyone regardless of sexual orientation. But no one likes that, do they?
What frustrates me most is that religious organizations have no place meddling in the civil arena. After all, even if the entire nation legalized gay marriage, churches could still refuse to perform matrimonial rites for them. That's one of the advantages bestowed by the separation of church and state.
Consequently, I resent hearing that my Church has been lobbying for this amendment when they are protected already. Couples aren't going to beat down the Holy See's door demanding to be married when they can celebrate in civil courts that welcome their presence. What's happening in San Francisco isn't scary or awful. It's remarkably routine, quietly hopeful.
Gay marriage is not some chimera lurking at the nation's door. It is a new beginning, a chance to demonstrate that everyone does receive equal access to our culture's most celebrated rites. Other countries have welcomed same-sex marriages with grace, and they seem better for it. I look forward to the day when we can follow their lead.
Respond to this posting
Back to top