Gay Rights: Equality or Hypocrisy?
The California Supreme Court struck down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage this week in a truly liberating decision that invalidates virtually any law that discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation. The 4-3 ruling declared the state constitution protects a fundamental “right to marry” that extends equally to same-sex couples. It tossed a highly emotional issue into the election year while opening the way for tens of thousands of gay people to wed in California, starting as early as mid-June.
The Decision
Chief Justice Ron George wrote for the court’s majority, which also included Justices Joyce Kennard, Kathryn Werdegar and Carlos Moreno stated: “Our state now recognizes that an individual’s capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual’s sexual orientation.” “Limiting the designation of marriage to a union ‘between a man and a woman’ is unconstitutional and must be stricken from the statute.” The ruling added that all California couples had a “basic civil right” to marry “without regard to their sexual orientation.” The justices said they would direct state officials “to take all actions necessary to effectuate our ruling,” including requiring county marriage clerks to carry out their duties “in a manner consistent with the decision of this court.”
Some History
The California court decision was a surprise coming from a moderately conservative, Republican-dominated court which legal scholars have long considered to be cautious. Experts said it is likely to influence other courts around the U.S. and many are eager for this long standing discrimination to come to an end. California already offers same-sex couples who register as domestic partners the same legal rights and responsibilities as married spouses, including the right to divorce and to sue for child support. However, before Thursday only one US state, Massachusetts, allowed gay marriage licenses to be issued, although California, New Jersey and Vermont have legislation which grants same-sex partners many of the same legal rights as married couples.
Governor will not overturn the court’s decision Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has twice vetoed legislation that would’ve granted marriage rights to same-sex couples, said in a news release that he respected the court’s decision and “will not support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn this state Supreme Court ruling.”
Today’s Pharisees Not surprisingly, a coalition of fear filled religious zealots and social conservative groups have vowed to attempt to add a vote calling for a ban on same-sex marriage when California goes to the polls in November’s election. Therefore, state election officials will be ruling next month on whether sponsors of the vote have gathered enough signatures to force the issue onto the ballot. “We have 1.1 million signatures,” according to the Reverend Lou Sheldon, chairman of the Washington-based Traditional Values Coalition, describing the California ruling as “completely out of line.” Heterosexism has worn the mask of religion and most particularly, of Christianity for far too long. The “love one another” commandments of Jesus, carry with them an expectation for followers to remain faithful to the values he established in his stance against the narrow minded and legalistic Pharisees of his day. So while there are religious voices conspiring against “liberty and justice for all” condemning this liberating act, quoting scripture, church law and tradition in desperate attempts to legally justify their fear and revulsion of same-gender love and attraction, we have no doubt that they are out-of-alignment. Without doubt, when religion uses God’s name in vain in order to exclude, marginalize, demonize and control a class of citizens, we can be sure that the mindset and behavior is not “Christ-like”.
My View Halleluia! for California. I’m Canadian. I’m a heterosexual female and I fought for same sex marriage rights in Canada. I entirely support the right of any two consenting adults who choose to enter into a life long union being able to contract do so. It is immoral and unconstitutional for democratic nations to deprive same sex citizens of the equal right to obtain a marriage license. It is invasive when governments and religious organizations try to control such a basic human need as to love and to be loved in return and to be acknowledged as good citizens for choosing to take care of one another. In fact, I do not believe for one single moment that the government or any religious organizations have any legitimate role to play in the bedrooms and broom closets of their citizens. For a country like America that purports to be “free” to deprive a class its citizens of the basic human right to contract in such a way as to be able to dispose their possessions appropriately upon the demise of one or the other is nothing short of outrageous hypocrisy.
I’m so proud of California for leading the way on this issue. I cannot wait for the other Americans states to read their constitution, stop all the BS-ing and face the truth. This is a human rights issue [full stop]. This mean spirited and hypocritical sanctioned discrimination that interferes with the right to contract by creating a dis-entitled class of citizens based on their sexual orientation that has endured for so long in a democracy is unconstitutional and intolerable and it must end. Clearly there are religious voices conspiring against “liberty and justice for all,” condemning this liberating act, quoting scripture, church law, and tradition to justify their fear and revulsion of same-gender love and attraction. Jesus Christ and his stand against the conniving legalistic Pharisees prevail. His “love one another” teachings provide no condoning of mean spirited, legalistic arguments. The latter are not credible and when religion uses the name of God in vain in order to exclude, marginalize, control and demonize a class of citizens, we can be certain that it is wrong. No matter what excuses may be offered to mask homophobia, hatred and systemic discrimination, the fact remains that one either believes that it’s reasonable that every citizen within a democracy be entitled to equal rights and equal access to all government services and, that the courts must uphold that right or not.
Do you believe in equal rights for all citizens or not?
References: California’s top court overturns gay marriage ban California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban Gay marriage opponents vow to fight Calif. ruling
Great post, and I absolutely believe in equal rights! I had grown so cynical that the California decision took me by surprise. I’d expected another defeat.
Hear, hear!
Not so sure about the Jesus thing, though. Of course, it’s a matter of conjecture which of the sayings attributed to him he actually said, but there is one instance where he proves himself less tolerant than Jewish law: on divorce. His statement about casting out the eye that looks lustfully at another has always struck me as extreme, too. I think it’s safe to say that a certain uptightness about sex and marriage goes back at least to the very early Christians (and presumably represents a reaction against Roman sexual practices, which condoned promiscuous and coercive sex of various kinds, including pederasty).
Yes! I believe in egual rights for all people! Your last line said it all.
Thank you for your article!
I have thought about this issue for quite some time, and will admit that originally I was opposed, because I thought that civil unions would provide what was needed.
I have read much lately that has changed my mind somewhat. Yet I still harbor the fear that this will be a “gateway” decision, so to speak, that will force churches to perform the ceremony. This will then blur the line of the seperation of church and state.
If I had that reassurance, I would embrace the decision whole heartedly. Until then, I sit and await the other shoe to drop, so to speak.
Fantastic post :) I’ve never understood homophobia, but maybe it’s because I’ve always been around openly gay people … who haven’t converted me, lol.
It really does seem so simple…equal rights for all. Not sure why people have to confuse it with a lot of fear and religious nonsence.
As for the US … it really does amaze me how strong their conservative roots are. If you only learn about the US through their entertainment industry … I think you’d be surprised at how conservative their politics are. It seems to be a real disconnect, and a bit scary, to be honest.
I agree with you, absolutely. Marriage for all — and equal treatment for all.
And I admire your ability to discuss the issue so cogently! :)
Great post. I’m proud to live in the state of California. I was one of the many who stood in front of the petitioners and attempted to convince people not to sign the petition for a referendum this fall. Unfortunately we failed so now we have to work tirelessly to make sure it doesn’t happen. Now that we have the right, it scares me that people are working to add to the constitution to take away a right from a group of people.
Joe. To avoid your problem would be a complete separation of church and state in the marriage issue. As my minister say, he does not like being an administer for the state. Let the state conduct legal civil unions for everyone. Then people can go to their church, if they so choose, and have a spiritual union conducted there.
My partner and I plan to have a great ceremony at our church, but we wouldn’t expect the Catholic Church, a Baptist church or others to conduct it for us, nor would we want them too.
Until then, I think you’re safe that churches won’t be forced to conduct marriages for same-gender couples. The certificate only has to be signed, which can be done by any judge. The ceremony is just a formality.
Not much to add except that I enjoyed your blog entry and feel the same.
This is just to let everyone know that I do value your comments and that I am reading them. I’m choosing not to respond yet because still more comments may be coming in. I have deleted the hostile comments and barely literate comments from scripture quoting religious zealots.
Really excellent post, and I completely agree.
Religious zealots……are the most hypocritical of human beings, guided by fear and ignorance. It’s a shame that the US has been nearly overrun by them. It makes me sad and very angry.
Anyway, I say CONGRATS to all those who marry under California’s new law! Discrimination sucks.
I want to thank each and everyone of those who have commented on this post. I believe that I have said everything that I want to say on this subject on the Blog Catalog forum. For those that haven’t read that exchange here’s the link to the discussion thread there.
Oh I am SOOOO glad you are such a powerful voice on this matter. It has done me good to hear someone with an open mind and heart that sees clearly what is “just” and humane and integral. I am honored to call you friend. I am moved to tears by your intolerance of judgment and injustice. I am so happy for the souls that can now marry in California….I mean how long are we going to exclude, judge and shame? IT HAS TO STOP NOW!
I’m a christian myself, but i agree that gays have rights to marriage.
But the law about gay marriage should not be enforced on institutions that doesnt allow it. Hence the Christian churches. It’s in the bible, it prohibits it.
I say, the law should create another church or organization where gays can freely perform their marriage rights there.
Response: What part of the law does not force anyone to be married in any church do you not comprehend? The subject matter here is the government issuing a licence. [fullstop]
What it all boils down to is the right to protect our families and assets in the same way that hetero couples can. The argument that gay marriage would somehow undermine conventional marriage is a ridiculous assertion.
Thanks for this post.
To Jeffrey:
You can’t be married in a Christian church without a civil marraige license. Why should any church have the right to determine who can be married, and where? What a crock!
The bible was written by humans. Interpreting it in a strict manner is the fault of the churches. If churches wish to retain their “non-profit” (which is itself a crock) status, they should also be forced to comply with civil law. After all, being viewed by the IRS as tax-exempt is a privilege, not a right.
It’s about time! I am a heterosexual female, married to my husband for over 20 years, and I absolutely believe this is the right and just thing to do. The only reason this has ever been an issue is due to religious factors and we, in America, are clearly supposed to have separation of church and state. Take religious beliefs out of the equation and there is no justification for not letting same sex couples get married. They should have the exact same rights that my husband and I are afforded in this country!
Thank you for posting about this important issue. I know I’ve said it before, but I’m standing right there next to you! You are a good soul and I thank you for being my friend. :o)
I find it very interesting that your comments are constantly bashing Christianity or religion, yet in the very same breath you proclaim free thoughts/speech for all. Does that mean free thoughts/speech for all … except Christians? I think Jeffrey expounded on a basic truth but why is he not free to voice his opinion (as was everyone else) without getting bashed? Just interesting…
@mokey
It’s unfortunate that you are choosing to use language like “I find it very interesting that your comments are constantly bashing Christianity or religion, yet in the very same breath you proclaim free thoughts/speech for all.” It’s unfortunate is because it means that you are more likely to don the mantle of the victim and wrap yourself in it, rather than entering open dialog with unbelievers. Your use of the word “bashing” makes it clear to me that you do NOT think this exercise of our freedom of speech is interesting. It seems that you choose to think it’s offensive when unbelievers choose exercise their freedom of speech to decry the fact that one of the most destructive forces on this planet has been the Christian movement and that, it needs to make broad and sweeping changes to regain any credibility at all.
The fact that you refer to my correction pertaining to Jeffery’s off base nonsense about churches being forced to marry homosexual people as bashing is pathetic. What part of the law does not force anyone to be married in any church do you not comprehend? The subject matter here in this post is the government issuing marriage licenses to all consenting adult citizens – full equality under the law.
We all know that Christianity ought to be a movement based on love, compassion, forgiveness and service. Many Christians do manifest these qualities — bless them! However, the truth is that the zeal involved in furthering the gospel message has led to the total destruction of native cultures and peoples, the championing paternalism, subjugation and abuse of women and children and gay bashing. Moreover, the dominance of Christian institutions working hand in glove with governments in Europe and North America has led to systemic institutional corruption and war mongering that resulted time and time again in the deaths of millions of people.
Luckily all is not lost and many healthy changes are underway in most Christian sects. You may be surprised to hear that many Christians, including my family members and friends, discuss these matters very openly with me. They are glad to share the changes they are making within their local church bodies to turn their institutions around so they can focus on loving, caring, forgiveness and service. And, I’m glad to recognize their contributions to the common good.
The subject matter of this post that you have left a comment on is: Gay Rights: Equality or Hypocrisy? Not surprisingly you have dodged actually commenting on it at all. Instead you submitted an off-topic bitchy, little whine and I have accommodated you by posting it. Normally I delete all off-topic comments just as I state in my comment policy above. I have made this one time exception for you.
Go in peace and be blessed with understanding
All too often religious zealots demand freedom of speech for themselves while at the same time denying it to others. Either we all have freedom or we don’t. However, that’s off the topic, and I apologize. On the topic, I’ve tried for some time to understand the argument that same-sex marriages will “undermine marriage”, and it’s never made sense to me. What I think it will really undermine is organizations that make money by exploiting peoples’ fears. Marriage is more threatened by divorce and people who enter into it too casually than it is by people of the same gender wanting to make a serious committment.
I’ve heard several people suggest that governments should not regulate marriage since it’s religion, and there is some merit to that argument, but the benefits that married couples share are, from a governmental perspective, a way of rewarding individuals who are willing to make a serious, meaningful committment to each other. As long as marriage comes with governmentally regulated benefits, it shouldn’t be denied to any couple solely on the basis of gender.
@Christopher
I agree with everything you have said. I fall into the group who believe that religion has no legitimate place in or relevance to equality in the context of the government granting marriage licenses to two consenting citizens who are not already married.
IMO that is what the issue is really about. It’s a human rights issue. And, no country that claims, as America does, to be based on freedom of religion, equality and justice ought to have set up a system that discriminates against any class of citizens when it comes to access to government services.
Unfortunately, the myth that America is a Christian nation has prevailed since Europeans invaded the North American continent, killed legions of First Nations peoples, who they deemed to be “savages”, stole their land from them, destroyed their culture and spiritual belief system, abused them and, subjugated those who survived in the name of God.
Even the most cursory reading of the New Testament books reveals that the behavior described in the forgoing paragraph is not in keeping with the teachings attributed to Jesus. Hence objections to same sex marriages coming from Christians have absolutely no credibility today.
Love your post. This is the third time I’ve read it and I have to thank you for writing it. I hope that California is a sign for future things to come and maybe just, just maybe we can move past this philosophy of hate.
Hi Larry,
I’m so with you on this. I cannot bear to hear another hateful word. Hopefully, Californians will vote to end this discrimination.
Thanks for the great post! I could not agree with you more. I just don’t understand peoples obsession with forcing their thoughts and beliefs on others sometimes.
Keep up the great work! Love your blog!
~Thenibblers
@Mr. Gentlenibbles
I don’t get it either. I can’t see how anyone who truly believes in equality would seek to discriminate against any two consulting adults being issued a marriage license from their government.
Regardless of what guise they may wrap themselves in, or what excuses they may offer, people who do wish to see government services dispensed based on discrimination against any class of citizens are IMO ill placed within a democracy.