Matters of Church and State

SAME SEX MARRIAGE

       It’s interesting to follow the political reaction to the President’s recent announcement of support for same sex marriage.  I expected conservative politicians and publications like the Wall Street Journal to explode in indignation and outrage.  But, they have been rather subdued – or perhaps wary might be a better term.

         They, like the President are still uncertain as to the political consequences of support, or non-support, for same-sex marriages.  Thus, the caution and wariness of both sides as they head for elections in November.

         Considering the political gamble he took – with more than 30 state constitutions banning some form of same-sex unions -- I thought the President’s decision was a brave one – and the right one.  Moreover, I don’t think his claim that his thinking was still evolving was merely a political hedge, as pundits have alleged.

         This evolution in thinking has been slow in coming for many of us, especially those of us raised in strong religious traditions.  But, in the last couple of decades, as we have worked and lived next to gays and lesbians and become friends and co-workers, the old prejudices melted away.  We found out they were not “queer,” but just like us, albeit with a different sexual orientation.   Thus, same sex civil unions became a no-brainer, but same sex marriage was another matter, and for many of us support for that came only fairly recently.  Part of the transformation was due to the example of same-sex couples providing stable, loving family environments for children. 

         Perversely, I must admit, one of the things that helped nudge me along, too, was my reaction to the sanctimony and hypocrisy of politicians and religious leaders waxing rhapsodically about the sacrosanctity of marriage as being possible only between a man and a woman.  Let’s be honest, if any other major institution in society had a 40-50 percent failure rate, there was would be calls for a constitutional amendment banning it.

         To me, once I dealt with my squeamishness, it came down to this:  Why not allow gays and lesbians to marry?  Why should they not be allowed the same privileges and responsibilities of other citizens?  Especially, with so many children desperately needing loving, stable environments to help them grow up to be good, responsible citizens.  I also thought about the parents of gays and lesbians hoping that their children would be afforded the same rights as other children.  It must be crushing to see their children treated as pariah.

         The May 21^st New Yorker reminds us that in the 1960s and even 1970s, there were many adults who said things like: “I’m all for civil rights. But marriage between Negroes and whites?  I don’t know…”  In 1968, “the year after the Supreme Court struck down Virginia’s anti-miscegenation law, in Loving v. Virginia, seventy-two percent of Americans disapproved of marriage between whites and non-whites and only twenty percent approved.”  Today, that sounds so quaint and retro – and so wrong.

         So, let’s hope that in 20-30 years, if not before, people will look back at this opposition to same-sex marriage as so quaint and retro – and so wrong headed as well.  It’s really not a matter of hope – it’s a matter of inevitability.  As the New Yorker observes: … “People will continue to want what they want and deserve what they deserve: the freedom to love whom they love and have that accepted… And, eventually, the [Supreme] Court will do the right thing on same sex marriage, just as the President did last week.”

Gerald E. Lavey