|
It has become clear to me that to argue against
same-sex civil marriage rights on the basis of
religious belief is to argue that civil marriage
rights equal sacramental marriage. Certainly there
are those who are legally married who are not
sacramentally married in the eyes of the church.
There may be people who are legally married who do not
share a spiritual union in the eyes of God and also
those who are not legally married who have a spiritual
union in the eyes of God. If the equation of civil
marriage rights with sacramental marriage is fallacious,
then the issue of civil marriage rights for same-sex
couples must be critiqued differently than we might
approach the decision of a church or congregation
to recognize same-sex unions in some way.
I have come to the conclusion that denial of civil
marriage rights to same-sex couples or differently
gendered people is an act of violence against the
people involved, regardless of whether I believe the
relationship is condoned by my faith or in the eyes of
God. For example - to be denied the right to see your
intimate partner of 20 years when your partner is in
an accident and is in the hospital because you are not
considered legal kin - that is violence. If your
intimate partner of 50 years is denied sharing your
room with you in the nursing home - that is violence.
When you are denied equal access to the social
security survivor benefits when your life-long
intimate partner dies and you have spent your assets
for his or her medical treatment - that is violence.
When the child a couple has raised together is taken
away from the only individual they have known as their
parent when their birth parent is deceased or
separated - that is violence. When the people in
these relationships and the children who are raised
in these families do not have the right to equal
protection of the integrity of their chosen familial
bonds - that is violence. Regardless of my beliefs
concerning the morality of the relationship involved,
it is not my place to support violence against the
people involved.
If we truly believe in the sacramental-civil
marriage equation, we would have to argue for removal
of children, denial of benefits, etc. to all whose
relationships we find morally disagreeable or are not
sanctioned in the eyes of our faith. Who is ready to
say that the heterosexual monogamous relationships of
pagans, atheists, agnostics, etc. are not worthy of
civil marriage rights because they are not married
within our faith? Certainly such arguments would be
dismissed as a violation of human rights and acts of
violence against those of other beliefs. There was a
time in this country when it was illegal for people
of different faiths to marry in some states. It was
not so long ago that it was illegal for people of
different races to marry in a large number of states
across this country.
I therefore call on all who stand for justice,
peace, and nonviolence to speak up for the right of
same-sex couples and differently gendered people to be
assured equal access to the 1,047 federal rights that
come along with marriage, as well as those that the
individual states confer on married couples.
|
Websites:
Books:
Same-Sex Marriage : Pro and Con
The Case for Same-Sex Marriage : From Sexual Liberty to Civilized Commitment
Also In This Issue:
|