Another state has passed legislation to allow same sex couples rights comparable to the entitlements marriage provides under the law. Some see it as a victory, others as a failure.
The frequency of the conversation grew an internal loop in the back of my mind: its churn dislodged my gut reaction.
I want to explore what it means to marry.
I won’t argue scripture or politics with anyone – a constructive discussion must start from neutral territory to get anywhere when sides fundamentally disagree. Much of my every reaction builds upon my well-established belief system instantaneously, effortlessly, in a way as reassuring as it is selfish. I don’t want your or my preconceived notions getting in the way here. I want to speak with you unabashedly. Raw.
There is an essential logic within us all that can span learned dogma. It’s at the core of our self-definition: homo sapien. Wise man. Let us think together about the learned emotive distractions insulating us from our sameness. As Einstein’s words note and as neuroscience discovered, logic is not devoid of emotion. They are intimately codependent. That is the kind of logic I appeal to here. The kind that strips away taught talking points and finds what’s left.
The first conversation to rise is often the religious one.
But government must not use the term ‘marriage’ religiously. That would violate the separation of church and state. Therefore, it’s fundamentally fallacious to consider a title that gives citizens rights under the law as a religious discussion. One just needs to consider what marriage entitles a couple in America to see. Religion does not give someone the right to hold their lover’s hand as s/he gasps a last breath. Nor do I check a box for tax deduction by identifying as Protestant, Buddhist or Jewish. Nor does the government keep records of communions or briss or pilgrimages. To make these religious acts result in political liberties is a direct violation of our constitution. For all these reasons it is clear religion holds no water here.
Religions now aside, there are laws to consider.
Law is what protects us – it is the framework by which we feel safe enough to be free. Without it, fear of theft - of violence - consume us whole. There is no freedom to live the comfortable lives we have today without laws established to safeguard our expression.
That understood, there are times when laws are broken.
This statement is no shock to a predominantly American audience. Our nation was founded illegally in the eyes of some and out of necessity to the eyes of our forefathers. It is the necessity of their rebellion that has survived the trials of time.
There are more recently events, in our own backyard and in lands far away, that show us ideas can outweigh the laws against them. Rosa Parks’ tired legs would never have made the news if blacks were equal in 1955. It’s the presence of her inequality that paints it a political act – a law broken. Twenty-five years earlier it was no different.
Mahatma Ghandi going hungry would have turned no eyes in an independent India. His empty stomach echoed empty favoritism and discrimination. These actions in and of themselves are not political. Likewise, I see no inherent partisanship in a symbolic act of commitment between consenting adults. It is there we see the matter as it is:
It is only at times of discrimination that basic social normalities are seen as political statements.
Fallaciousness of the arguments made is relevant enough to vent, but it is not the core of my empathy for hopeful gay couples today. Now with the two most common distractions set aside, the substance of why I care at all about a law I will never utilize firsthand can take place.
The heart of the discussion has nothing to do with homo or hetero, marriage or domestic partnership, politics or law. My stomach aches during these discussions because of how easily you can separate anyone from yourself. That isn’t clear in the abstract - we’re taught in Judeo-Christian western culture that selves are independent, never to overlap. Let’s get concrete.
How about instead of gays being restricted to unsanctioned commitment, it was Jews? Just Jews – there are maybe 15 million of us. That’s only about .000002% of the world’s population, and it would not be the first time in history. From 1938-1945 it was legislatively illegal in many nations and socially repulsive in many more to engage with a Jew. What separates us from that once acceptable meme of exclusion? Or how about interracial couples - I know of family disowning their children for marrying outside their race just a generation ago. Would an interracial couple make the news today?
Maybe you can’t sympathize. It can be difficult to relate to lives not lived; persecution not felt firsthand.
What if it was just you who couldn’t marry anyone? Not anyone else in the world - just you. You are the best man in your friend’s wedding; celebrate your parent’s 30th anniversary, all with as much JOY as JEALOUSY. You will never have these moments first hand. Would anyone else care? Maybe? Yes? Why should they?
Now we are in it - the heart of the matter.
When it feels like you are separated, that’s when you have the capacity to feel the contradiction in democratic law concluding ‘you cannot love like others love.’ Acts against gay marriage under the law is scripture being quoted out of context like the words of Nietzsche were twisted to fit the Third Reich’s lust for power and science was used to separate concentration camp victims from their own bodies. It is double standard masquerading as piety.
This inequality is the corruption of Constitutional axioms, for all mankind is created equal.
Gay couples are not asking for your approval to love – they cannot curb their butterflies for another anymore than you or I. What they are asking for is equality. Who they are asking is the law. It is about equal protection under that law. These are their rights.
That is what ‘marriage’ means in our system today.
The right to claim one another on tax returns;
The right to hold another’s hand,
until death do them part.
* Inspired by the words of David Foster Wallace and the heart of Andrea Gibson.
