The success of Prop.H8 has really pissed liberals off. The protests, the email chains, the celebrity calls to action, the tears ... but really, why should people expect any different? Advocates of gay marriage continue fighting this battle on the opposition’s turf, and they get beaten every time. Stop bahsing your heads against this brick wall! You must change tactics!!
'Marriage' is a religious institution. Argue against that point all you want, but as long as the customs and taboos of matrimony are determined by cultural realities, American marriage will involve Judeo-Christianity. You can thank the Protestant Reformation for that, and also the Counter Reformation for transforming the whole affair into a contest for human souls. Marriage has been associated with religion for a long time, and it will be extremely difficult to erase that from our collective consciousness.
I recognize there are such things as “civil marriages.” My father and his second wife held one, and it was blissfully free of religious influence. But therein lies a crucial point to all this. The United States government adopted marriage as a means of legally uniting two people. And further, it’s made no attempt to divorce civil marriage from the ideas traditionally (read, religiously) tied to such a union. That’s an area our elected officials want the people to decide for ourselves (in all our cultural wisdom.) It’s when the people decide to disenfranchise minorities that our government should prove to us they are NOT espousing religious ideas … and so far, they are not.
There’s a lot riding on this gay marriage thing for the Religious Right. Even the language used by conservatives tells us their agenda: that marriage is a 'sacred' institution, and that a constitutional amendment will preserve the 'sanctity' of the union. Homosexual unions do not mesh with their beliefs about reality. Beliefs like an almighty god who frowns on certain sexual behavior, actually causes hurricanes and floods because of sexual 'deviance'. Beliefs like the corruption of children from exposure to same sex unions. This is part of a much larger war to the religious, a war of intrusion on their worldview. And as we’ve seen before, there are enough Americans who belong to some branch or sect or schism of Christianity to have a real impact on this issue.
My father’s union, secular though it was in ceremony, is still considered normal in the eyes of the Church and thus not the target of a major political referendum. And there are lots of reasons why heterosexuals might chose civil marriages, most obvious being the issue of cost. But once you stray from cultural norms, the Church storms back into the room to shout.
Prop.H8 was no different. I knew the vote would be close because there were reports of massive evangelical outreach – we’re talking national support – all pouring into select states to knock on doors and influence votes. Again, religious influence, and you can see by this example that change is possible. The churches don’t hold ultimate sway over government, rather over the hearts and minds of the electorate. This religious perception held by so many is the brick wall I want to avoid.
For this reason, I’m asking supporters of the gay and lesbian community to shift their tactics. I say we let go and give back marriage to religious conservatives. That’s right, I said give it back. I don’t believe marriage is truly what gays want. We want the rights and obligations bestowed upon married couples by the federal government, including the right to share property, custody with children, and hospital visitation rights in emergency situations. This is a matter of equality, not sacrament.
When the Religious Right begins to froth over this, our elected officials SHOULD explain the difference between holding beliefs and having government champion those beliefs. Some high ranking official – someone who governs us ALL – should proudly declare that “Anyone can believe certain people should be excluded, but really, when those people pay their taxes, when they contribute to society by holding jobs and generally obeying our laws and customs, WE CANNOT EXCLUDE THEM!!” In fact, our representatives should be sending two messages: one to gays declaring freedom of speech and religious expression, and one to churches stating the nature of government to represent all people equally. And that should be that ... but it’s not.
This issue has become one of separation of Church and State. Our government allows a certain faction of its citizenry to be excluded based on the religious intolerance of a majority. No other country that allows for same sex unions has crumbled as a result. Any evidence to the contrary is slanderous superstition.
But because so many people can ONLY see the issue of marriage from a religious point of view, I say we give it to them. Let marriage return to what it truly is, a ceremonial union between one man and one woman blessed by god. Leave our government to INCLUDE religious ceremonies as one of a few options for matrimony in America. Instead of “intruding” on puritan beliefs, I’m asking us to appeal to our government to create a marital institution that ALL Americans can hold as sacred. Like civil marriages, only without the opportunity for religious nuts to get all bent out of shape. Civil unions.
Now don’t cringe. I want to focus on what’s really important here: legal recognition that is parallel if not same to heterosexuals. Maybe sometime in the future we can convince the Church to relax its collective sphincter about homosexuality. Maybe. But until then, we cannot invite an argument over what is sacred. We just look stupid.
Instead we should be offering an olive branch; asking for the same privileges while backing slowly away from their precious traditions. You know, looking like the good guys by comparison. But we’ll also be positioning ourselves for a Church v. State battle. Because if the religious communities decide that it was REALLY allowing homosexuals rights that was their issue … well … I think that is a battle that we can raise above mere referendum, all the way to the Supreme Court.
'Marriage' is a religious institution. Argue against that point all you want, but as long as the customs and taboos of matrimony are determined by cultural realities, American marriage will involve Judeo-Christianity. You can thank the Protestant Reformation for that, and also the Counter Reformation for transforming the whole affair into a contest for human souls. Marriage has been associated with religion for a long time, and it will be extremely difficult to erase that from our collective consciousness.
I recognize there are such things as “civil marriages.” My father and his second wife held one, and it was blissfully free of religious influence. But therein lies a crucial point to all this. The United States government adopted marriage as a means of legally uniting two people. And further, it’s made no attempt to divorce civil marriage from the ideas traditionally (read, religiously) tied to such a union. That’s an area our elected officials want the people to decide for ourselves (in all our cultural wisdom.) It’s when the people decide to disenfranchise minorities that our government should prove to us they are NOT espousing religious ideas … and so far, they are not.
There’s a lot riding on this gay marriage thing for the Religious Right. Even the language used by conservatives tells us their agenda: that marriage is a 'sacred' institution, and that a constitutional amendment will preserve the 'sanctity' of the union. Homosexual unions do not mesh with their beliefs about reality. Beliefs like an almighty god who frowns on certain sexual behavior, actually causes hurricanes and floods because of sexual 'deviance'. Beliefs like the corruption of children from exposure to same sex unions. This is part of a much larger war to the religious, a war of intrusion on their worldview. And as we’ve seen before, there are enough Americans who belong to some branch or sect or schism of Christianity to have a real impact on this issue.
My father’s union, secular though it was in ceremony, is still considered normal in the eyes of the Church and thus not the target of a major political referendum. And there are lots of reasons why heterosexuals might chose civil marriages, most obvious being the issue of cost. But once you stray from cultural norms, the Church storms back into the room to shout.
Prop.H8 was no different. I knew the vote would be close because there were reports of massive evangelical outreach – we’re talking national support – all pouring into select states to knock on doors and influence votes. Again, religious influence, and you can see by this example that change is possible. The churches don’t hold ultimate sway over government, rather over the hearts and minds of the electorate. This religious perception held by so many is the brick wall I want to avoid.
For this reason, I’m asking supporters of the gay and lesbian community to shift their tactics. I say we let go and give back marriage to religious conservatives. That’s right, I said give it back. I don’t believe marriage is truly what gays want. We want the rights and obligations bestowed upon married couples by the federal government, including the right to share property, custody with children, and hospital visitation rights in emergency situations. This is a matter of equality, not sacrament.
When the Religious Right begins to froth over this, our elected officials SHOULD explain the difference between holding beliefs and having government champion those beliefs. Some high ranking official – someone who governs us ALL – should proudly declare that “Anyone can believe certain people should be excluded, but really, when those people pay their taxes, when they contribute to society by holding jobs and generally obeying our laws and customs, WE CANNOT EXCLUDE THEM!!” In fact, our representatives should be sending two messages: one to gays declaring freedom of speech and religious expression, and one to churches stating the nature of government to represent all people equally. And that should be that ... but it’s not.
This issue has become one of separation of Church and State. Our government allows a certain faction of its citizenry to be excluded based on the religious intolerance of a majority. No other country that allows for same sex unions has crumbled as a result. Any evidence to the contrary is slanderous superstition.
But because so many people can ONLY see the issue of marriage from a religious point of view, I say we give it to them. Let marriage return to what it truly is, a ceremonial union between one man and one woman blessed by god. Leave our government to INCLUDE religious ceremonies as one of a few options for matrimony in America. Instead of “intruding” on puritan beliefs, I’m asking us to appeal to our government to create a marital institution that ALL Americans can hold as sacred. Like civil marriages, only without the opportunity for religious nuts to get all bent out of shape. Civil unions.
Now don’t cringe. I want to focus on what’s really important here: legal recognition that is parallel if not same to heterosexuals. Maybe sometime in the future we can convince the Church to relax its collective sphincter about homosexuality. Maybe. But until then, we cannot invite an argument over what is sacred. We just look stupid.
Instead we should be offering an olive branch; asking for the same privileges while backing slowly away from their precious traditions. You know, looking like the good guys by comparison. But we’ll also be positioning ourselves for a Church v. State battle. Because if the religious communities decide that it was REALLY allowing homosexuals rights that was their issue … well … I think that is a battle that we can raise above mere referendum, all the way to the Supreme Court.
4 comments:
I absolutely agree with you...let them keep marriage. It really does just come down to equality and equal rights. I really don't care much about what they call it...just grant me the rights that I deserve. I don't need their god's "blessing" on my union or anything else in my life. It seems to me that most things that are "blessed" or "touched" by their god end up not working in the way they were originally intended. Most "blessed" marriages end in divorce nowadays, which is still a sin in many religions. Most churches still preach intolerance, hate and judgment to the masses. Many holy men still cannot control the urges they have. Tell me again why I want their god's blessing? So yes I say let them keep marriage...just give me equality.
Very good Mr. – your ideas need to be vocalized to an even bigger stage. Time to equalize marriage but not in the way many straights think per your ideas. Their marriage needs to be knocked down a peg.
Marriage in America is much more than a legal contract... it's charged with religious connotations. This shouldn't be a surprise; when you run ANYTHING through Church doors, any ceremony or community function, it becomes tainted with religion.
I don't want blessed by their god, I want equal treatment from my government. The two should not depend on one another.
It surprises me the number of gay men and women who take issue with civil unions. "If we're truly to be equal" they say, "it must be marriage." My argument is that a majority of people who get 'married' do not view homosexuals as equal, which is why it's so damn hard to gain access to their traditions to begin with.
I'm willing to accept a bit of Jim Crow philosophy... separate but equal. I'm angling for a legal argument the gay and lesbian community can actually win. Focus on what's important NOW, convince the rednecks to agree later.
If you think about it, the United States has a real opportunity here. It could create civil unions for everyone, gay, straight, religious and non. That way, we all get the bennies and the Church is pushed out of government involvement. WIN WIN!
I like that...tainted with religion. I could not agree more. But sadly it is the church that runs our country and makes our governments minds up. Until there is TRUE separation of church and state...we can't win.
Post a Comment