Why is Marriage such a hot-button issue?

By Dan Kirk on 05/12/2009 @ 01:26 PM

Tags:

Like anyone else who has debated the merits of marriage for our community, I have heard the concept that we should push for ‘Civil Unions’ instead of marriage. The core principle of this tactic is that ‘marriage’ has religious connotations beyond the legal aspects of marriage. By using ‘Civil Union’ instead of marriage, we focus the discussion on the legal aspects only, taking it out of the realm of ‘religion’.

For a long time I held this opinion. Call them Civil Unions, don’t call it marriage. Why should we engage in a religious debate when it’s not necessary? If we could keep the discussion solely on the issues of legal rights, we make good progress.

Certainly that is the majority opinion of people in this country. Recent polls have shown a majority of Americans support Civil Unions for LGBT couples. That’s right, we stand in a place where they majority of Americans support us having legal rights in our relationships. Why then am I now working with a group calling itself “Yes on Marriage”?

The answer to that question isn’t an easy one to face as a community. You see, when we accept Civil Unions, or anything other than what everyone else is allowed, we create something separate for ourselves. We become something ‘special’, as many of our detractors claim. Further, we ignore the bull in our china shop, the simple fact that the Number #1 enemy of all gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, or even questioning people comes from one sector of our society.

We ignored that in California during the fight against Proposition 8, and one of the most liberal states in the nation passed a law taking away our right to marry.

Albert Mohler, a leader of the Southern Baptist Convention wrote an essay titled “No Truth Without Love, No Love Without Truth”. If you haven’t read it, you can find it on his website ( http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=3661 ). It’s a long read, but it can be synopsized in just a few phrases.

#1 – It’s not okay to be gay and conservatives need to stick to this message.

#2 – Not only is it not okay to be gay, it is an abomination and must be confronted directly.

#3 – The only good homosexual is one that has turned away from any expression of their homosexuality and live within the teachings of their church.

Gay Marriage might be the latest battleground, but the people leading the charge against marriage are not going to just settle for stopping us from getting married. We are sinners in their belief pattern, and should have no recognition or rights whatsoever to live our lives openly and with freedom. Sure, they couch their language in positive terms these days, saying we should ‘join’ their way of life, and we have allowed them to mask their true agenda behind this flowery language.

What is needed is a direct confrontation, with direct questions like:

Should gay couples be allowed to have rights and responsibilities as a couple, such as the ability to make medical decisions, to file taxes jointly, to buy a home together?

We know their answer already. It’s going to be “no” or if they play with the new rulebook of ‘nice language’ it’s going to be ‘just don’t call it marriage!’. That shouldn’t be the end of the conversation though, because we know the majority of Americans support us having these rights. The next question needs to be stronger.

What is the problem with giving this recognition to gay and lesbian couples, using the same name as is given to the relationship for all other similar couple?

In the case of ‘just give it another name’, we need to throw back the ‘special rights’ argument. We don’t want ‘special rights’ or ‘special categories’. What we are arguing for is the same rights, the same responsibilities, and we don’t appreciate their trying to push us into a ‘special’ category.

For the ‘it’s an abomination’ crowd, we have to get them to say what they truly mean.

Dan Kirk has been active in the LGBT rights movement for sixteen years, starting with the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” debates in the early 90s. Helping to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act has become one of his highest priorities.