On marriage

If you're not familiar with Proposition 8 in California, you probably aren't aware of the battle that has been waged over who has the right to marry. Passage of this proposition would restrict the right to marry as only between a man and a woman and would eliminate same-sex marriage. I have been very surprised to see how the issue has been dealt with on both sides so I thought I'd reflect a bit about Proposition 8, the institution of marriage, and who can make claims to marriage.

Starting with my own experiences, I have been married for five years now. When I got married, I really did not think too much about the experience of it except that it was a ceremony and tradition that was more for my family and friends than for myself and my partner. I knew deep down that I would be with D, regardless of our status as married or not. I am critical sometimes about the institution of marriage because I don't think marriage should change a relationship between two committed people. I also don't think too much about marriage because of its heteronormative nature, which I've felt even before the controversy of gay marriage became a hot button social issue. I've always thought that it was strange that a man and a woman could get married but a same-sex couple could not. If marriage was ever about declaring life long commitment and love between two people, I cannot understand why a same-sex couple could not make the same commitments in the eyes of the state, their family, and their friends.

So I did not take and do not continue to take for granted my ability to get married simply because I am a heterosexual. However, I do think that many other heterosexuals do take for granted their ability to get married. It seems silly to me to regulate marriage over individuals because I see marriage as truly private decision between two people and their families, even though the ceremony itself is a public declaration of commitment. The decisions is after all, between two people who love each other very much and I think there are far fewer people who talk about getting married to take advantage of things like health benefits and access to citizenship. For the most part, American society treats marriage more as a social statement than a pragmatic, utilitarian agreement between two people.

Yet the issue of rights is where the pro/con line gets drawn. Those supporting the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman spend a lot of time fanning the fears of heterosexuals (and conservative gays to a certain extent). Proponents make claims that gay marriage will be taught in school (and the slippery slope of gay sex and other deviant forms of sexuality), the sanctity of the family and social fabric will erode because anyone will have access to marriage (one ad claimed that in countries where similar laws passed have opened marriage up to siblings), children in same-sex families will be socially confused because they are not raised by the ideal family structure (man and woman as father and mother), and my favorite claim that the moral fabric in general will decline because of the overall dignity and sanctity of marriage as an insitution that upholds societal structure is now gone (including the increase of prostitution and sexual deviancy).

How do these claims all connect back to marriage itself? I think if we stop for a moment to consider the paranoia and fantastic rhetoric surrounding why marriage needs to be between a man and a woman, these claims fall apart. In fact, these claims kind of remind of the arguments about that violent video games should be banned because violence in video games teach children to be violent, and junk food should be banned because they cause chcildhood obesity. I think that trying to control the choices that one makes or can make is not really getting at the root of the problem. With video game violence, the root of the problem is why children are spending so much time playing video games in the first place and why they are not given or are not interested in participating in a variety of of other activities. With junk food, the root of the problem lies in what is available for families to eat that is quick and affordable (not much). With marriage, the root problem is HOMOPHOBIA.

When will proponents acknowledge their homophobia? I don't understand why gays and lesbians threaten heterosexuals so much. If you acknowledge that there are inherent differences between people, which we tell children is what makes people unique, why can't fearful heterosexuals just view gays and lesbians individuals who are just different? Why can't heterosexuals acknowledge their privileged status in society? Living amongst gays and lesbians won't hurt you; their rights won't harm your right to get married and to raise and teach your children anyway you want. So what business is it of heterosexuals to mandate that same-sex couples cannot get married? Marriage is something that anyone should be able to do if they want to. Proponents of Prop 8 need to stop the hate- and fear-mongering and get on with their lives. They need to see this moment as an opportunity to grow and have conversations that foster understanding between people. They need to understand that same-sex couples are as loving (and hurtful) towards their partners and children as heterosexuals are. They need to understand that being married or not won't change how people treat one another - it is only through understanding and dialog that we all can grow to understand and appreciate each other's differences. So I really see that a vote to pass Prop. 8 shows the closed-mindedness of the Californians.

The one bone I do have to pick is with opponents of Prop 8 who have used destructive tactics including destroying Yes on Prop 8 signs and other forms of intimidation. No destructive actions are productive to waging a successful campaign. Votes can only be won through opening hearts and minds. Destruction only turns people off and further reinforces why being against gay marriage is correct - because those who support same-sex marriage are disrespectful of traditional views, destructive (literally) of society, and are too radical/crazy/out there/different than traditionalists.

So if you're still on the fence about Prop. 8, I ask you to look into your heart and to think long and hard about why you are unwilling to vote No. If you come to the conclusion that you are homophobic, even a little, don't use your privilege as a heterosexual to deny the ability for gays to get married. Show your open-mindedness and willingness to share your privilege. Be open to the love that same-sex couple can also share between each other. Help foster a society in which you enable acceptance and more love between people to be a way to address social problems.