Why Gay Marriage Matters

Here's a website devoted to fighting the proposed gay marriage ban in Wisconsin. And the story on the front page demonstrates why the fight for gay marriage matters - because real people with real families suffer under the status quo. I'll paste a long story from that site below the fold:

Lynn and Jean had been together for 15 years when they adopted Katy. Jean had many students who came from homes that lacked the support and love children deserve, and she and Lynn knew they could provide a healthy, happy home for a child who needed one.

Katy was home for only nine months when Jean was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Lynn, a physical therapist, cut down her work hours in order to juggle caring for Jean and taking care of a new baby.

Lynn was not recognized as Jean's next of kin--as her family. Because they were legal strangers, they faced extra obstacles beyond those any family faces when a loved one is dying of cancer.

This meant Lynn had to worry about whether she would be able to see Jean in the hospital. There were moments during Jean's most difficult days when it was not clear that Lynn would be able make critical, urgent medical decisions.

When it became clear that Jean was going to die, Lynn faced the prospect of losing the love of her life and having to raise Katy as a single mom. She was worried about the finances, knowing she had no legal recognition as a surviving spouse.

Instead of focusing solely on sharing Jean's final days, Lynn and Jean had to bring a lawyer into the hospital--and spend thousands of dollars--to try to provide for Katy's future. They did what they could, but even with those basic measures, things were still harder than they had to be. For example, Lynn had no legal right to Jean's pension, and anything Jean could pass on to Lynn would be taxed because they were legal strangers in the eyes of the law.

Even after Jean died, Lynn was refused the final medical report. In order to obtain it she had to have Jean's out-of-town relative sign for it.

Jean never wanted to rock the boat for her students, so she didn't talk much about her family or about being gay.

Although many in the community suspected that Jean was gay and understood that Lynn was her family, it had never been openly discussed. But once Jean grew ill, many people came forward to support Lynn, Katy, and Jean--as a family. The woman who owned and ran Katy's day care center insisted on donating her services to the family when Lynn had to be with Jean during her sickness. Teachers came forward to express their support and help Lynn. And an extended network of Lynn and Jean's friends organized a system where they would drop food off at a central spot and someone would deliver it to the family's home in Arcadia.

School kids and teachers organized several projects to support her, including "Jean's Day," when everyone wore ribbons made of jean denim to remember Jean. One day, Lynn found out that her students were in the midst of a penny drive to support Jean. After Jean passed away, the school dedicated a new greenhouse in her name.

When we debate the constitutional ban on civil unions and marriage, we're talking about people like Jean, Lynn, and Katy. People with families who work hard and make important contributions to Wisconsin communities. The amendment would hurt these families in every part of the state, and that's why it's wrong.

People ask me why I care so much about this issue; that's why. Because I know people like Jean and Lynn, people I care about. And for those who think that support for gay marriage is somehow a sign of "moral relativism", I can only laugh. My position on this issue is a moral one, and an absolutist one at that. It is immoral to deny to others the privileges and protections I am able to take for granted merely by virtue of being straight. I cannot justify denying to them those protections that allow for some minimal peace of mind during life's most difficult circumstances.

For those of you who think that you are doing God's will by fighting to keep such protections from these people, I can only remind you of one of the most compelling passages in the Bible, the words of Jesus himself: "Whatever you do to the least of these, my brethren, you do unto me as well." Put yourself in their place for a moment. Stop seeing them as sinners or as evil people bent on destroying everything good and decent. Start seeing them as real people, people with loved ones and children and families. That's what they are, whether you recognize it or not.

Tags

More like this

Recently I was watching an HBO comedy special starring Ellen Degeneres. I only watched her sitcom a few times when it was on, but I've always thought she was quite funny and original. And I've always respected the way she handled that big "coming out" show that got so much attention. She didn't…
Via Jason Kuznicki, a story I missed: the governor of Maryland, Robert Ehrlich, has vetoed a bill that would have given gay couples the legal right to be treated as a relative in medical situations. As the Washington Post reports: Modeled after laws in California, Hawaii and other states, the…
As Arizona ramps up its attempt to win national "America's stupidest laws" competition (hotly contested, admittedly) by prioritizing heterosexual married couples over gay people and singles for adoption, there's a lovely story about two gay fathers and their 12 children adopted from foster care:…
This weekend in the Washington Post, there's an article about a couple who first met while serving in various capacities during WWII, who just celebrated their marriage in DC this weekend after a "62 year engagement." This would be a romantic story in any context - but it isn't a story of parted…

Very good post. It's amazing how some people are just blinded to this by their irrational hatred. Hopefully we'll move on and afford these people the rights everyone else enjoys, but given this country's history it'll probably take a few years.

Thanks Ed. This topic is probably the one I read most closely here, other than stories about Gribbet and Casey Luskin, which just make me laugh. But these sociopaths hell bent on reclassifying gays as something other than regular citizens just make me seethe.

As it happens, my father was gay, although I would oppose these moves regardless. He and my mother were married for 17 years before he was unable to pretend any longer. He grew up in a conservative environment in the 30's and 40's in Mississippi, so that even though he knew about himself, he also knew he couldn't be open about it. He died a couple of years ago, and to this day some of his relatives there sneer when they talk about him. While he never was in a relationship after my parents split that would ever have been a marriage, the fact that he was treated the way he was bothers me. When people talk about "the gays" I remind them they are real people, including people that are very close to me.

My mother-in-law, a good-hearted but dutiful and not overly inquisitive Lutheran, once asked me, "Why should we allow 'them' to marry?" I asked her, "Why shouldn't we?" This was two years ago and I am still waiting for the answer. From her or anyone else who opposes the idea, at least one that doesn't involve religion.

My mother-in-law, a good-hearted but dutiful and not overly inquisitive Lutheran, once asked me, "Why should we allow 'them' to marry?"

Ummm.... because it's the decent, kind, and right thing to do?

The popular stereotype of homosexuals being promiscuous-orgy-indulging-wantonists, simply isn't bourn out as often as the religous right would think. Probably no more often than similar cases amongst heterosexuals.

As is true amongst heterosexuals, most of that behavior is "grown out of."

I remember when I was young, all the promiscuous sex parties... For me they only happened in my mind, but it wasn't for lack of drive. But I was never one to let things get out of hand.

Contrary to the bible many "christians" don't see the "sinner" they only see the "sin" when it comes to GLBTs. They certainly don't see gay families as families - thus they can feel just fine trying to tear them apart.

By DuWayne aka Treban (not verified) on 19 Sep 2006 #permalink

The war on gay marriage is a war on love and a war on family.

The sort of people whose sole driving principle is to deny other people happiness make my skin crawl with utter contempt and disgust.

Were these people simply raised in miserable, unhappy, unloving families themselves? Because I can think of no other reason to want to dedicate your life to denying that sense of love and contentment and security to people you either do not know or never have to interact with should you so choose.

Awful, dismal, depressing, hollow, empty, mean, low, vindictive people, the lot of 'em.

Awful, dismal, depressing, hollow, empty, mean, low, vindictive

Thank you. That is a perfect description of Michelle Bachmann, the former state senator who is running to replace Mark Kennedy as the US Rep from Minnesota's 6th disctrict (my district, sadly). Bachmann is the one who kept reintroducing the MN Amendment to ban same-sex marriage. Fortunately, it kept getting defeated. Unfortunately, she currently holds a double-digit lead over the Dem, Patty Wetterling. At least Kennedy is trailing in his Senate race by 56-31, according to the latest poll here.

PS-I would also add hateful and duplicitous.

Ummm.... because it's the decent, kind, and right thing to do?

Well, yes, but she doesn't see it that way. She believes she is defending traditional marriage, although she has yet to explain to me from what. "The gays", I suppose.

BTW-I really like my mother-in-law, she's just wrong. she also thinks we should bomb Iran. You know, now that I think about it...

PS-I would also add hateful and duplicitous.

Drat - I hate it when my rants aren't vitriolic enough!

Just to add - the thing that bothers me most about the gay marriage business is that it is a purely destructive motivation. By banning gay marriage you are not making a positive step, simply destroying something.

Having attended a couple of gay weddings (actually, we are still supposed to call them 'civil ceremonies' over here) I am really pissed off about all this. I remember watching the same sort of 'giddy with happiness' glow on the faces of the two couples in question as you get at every marriage and I keep thinking to myself: if you ban this, you aren't changing your own life, you aren't altering your own circumstances in any way, you are simply taking someone else's happiness and ruining it for your own satisfaction. Well done. Really, excellent. I am sure that is exactly what Jesus would want you to spend your time doing.

Quoting the New Testament won't help, Ed. As I finally figured out a couple of years ago, the religious fundamentalists have found a way to ignore all those inconvenient passages of Jesus talking about love, compassion, and understanding.

The argument is that when it comes to state affairs, legislation, etc. it's the Old Testament that matters. That's where God's plan for running a nation is defined (i.e. the ancient Jewish nation is the template).

So, to them, compassion and love are fine on a personal level, but just don't try and live by those rules when it comes to governing. Thus hurtful discrimination and the causing the suffering of others is sinful unless it is in the name of the law.

Frankly, I've heard very little New Testament teachings since I came to America. It's a massive inconvenience to conservative Christians who revel in idea of tough-guy America beating up on all of their enemies, foreign and domestic. When was the last time you heard a Christian leader talking about the Beatitudes? It's all Ten Commandments all the time.

Perhaps it is Ten Commandments all the time, but I don't recall sexuality in those commandments. In fact, if one weighs what the Bible says about kindness, defense of weak, compassion, etc. against what the Bible says about sexuality, it seems clear that, were there a god, he or she would much rather we care for each other with no concern as to their sexuality. But again, those who hit hardest with the Bible are often reading it the least.