This will probably be inflammatory and I apologize ahead of time if I tick anyone off. First and foremost, understand that I respect the rights of everyone to have an opinion and a position. After all, the beauty of freedom of speech and freedom of religion is that I would defend your right to your speech and your religion as long as it injured no one and it made you happy.
That being said, I have to question a world where we are celebrating limiting freedom and the application of bigotry that is being cheered on. We can dress it up in all the political and religious terms that we want to, but declaring that same-sex couples have the right to all the benefits associated with marriage in the form of domestic partnerships and civil unions, but denying them the right to use the word marriage because it might – just might – put those relationships on equal footing with anyone else.
Prejudice
Prejudice and bigotry are not words that anyone wants associated with them. To be honest, I hate to use those words here in this blog. But when you see it going on all over the place it’s hard to keep my peace. The Defense of Marriage Act is – in its essence – prejudicial. I’ve heard the arguments that it protects women from polygamy and that it defends marriage as a sacred institution – it’s prejudicial.
If we had a law that stated marriage is a union between a white woman and a white man, people would be up in arms. Yet only a few decades ago, there were laws that prevented interracial marriage because people thought it was wrong. Do you know how many interracial couples are out there today? Barack Obama, a Democratic presidential candidate is the product of an interracial marriage.
Small-Minded
It’s petty and it’s small-minded to say to ‘same-sex’ couples that their relationships would sully the sacred institution enjoyed by heterosexual couples. Marriage should be about celebrating commitment, love and intimacy – not gender bias. There is no room for compromise on either side of the issue – one side wants to defend the institution of marriage and the other side wants to celebrate their relationships because they have great respect and love for the institution of marriage.
Why else would same-sex couples not be satisfied with the meager bone of civil unions? After all, it gives them all the same benefits, right? It’s not federally recognized and it doesn’t give you the same romance as say the word marriage proposal – but it should be good enough right?
If you were to put gay marriage to the vote right now, across all fifty states – I believe it would be defeated. Honestly, because more than just the conservative left would beat their chests and rush out to vote against it. If you put the Defense of Marriage Act to a referendum and asked if marriage should be defined as a union between one man and one woman, it would also pass. The flip side to that is that is if you put a measure on the ballot that asked:
Should same-sex couples who wish to enter a committed relationship be allowed to do so, with all the rights, prerogatives and privileges of opposite-sex couples?
Chances are it would pass, too.
It’s the word marriage. It brings out prejudice and bigotry. I know it’s ugly and it’s unpleasant and I’m not equating it with religion. There are plenty of clergy that support initiatives to give same-sex couples equality in the eyes of marriage law. It’s the word marriage – it creates the great divide and I’ve known people who have homosexual individuals as their best friends and who love them to pieces – and they’d rather lay down in the road and get run over than see a same-sex marriage law pass.
I wish I had another word for it – but it’s prejudice and it’s bigotry, but that’s just my opinion.
Please Note: The use of the word bigot may have created the unfortunate atmosphere that shut down discussion. I apologize to anyone who may have been offended. It has been rightfully pointed out to me that when the word bigot is invoked, it shuts the discussion down — that is the last thing I wish to do. So please, accept my apologies if you felt you could not be heard for fear of this label — the idea was to discuss it, not to charge anyone with it.
Disclaimer: The opinion of the author is expressly her own and does not reflect that of Families.com. Families.com does not advocate for a gay lifestyle. The intent of these blogs is encourage discussion of Marriage Issues that are relevant and current topics in our society and legal system.
For more on this issue and more check out our Marriage Debates.