JOHNSON COLUMN: Marriage question about civil rights
By R. J. Johnson, Sauk Prairie Eagle columnist
What is harder? Being black or being gay? Being gay, because you don’t have to tell your parents you’re black. That is one of my favorite jokes by Al Franken.
Any good comedy that is also social commentary, will contain a nugget of truth. In this country that is still dominated by straight white Christians, why would anyone choose to be gay, black or atheist?
Of the three, only being an atheist is a choice.
I’m sure that most black people are happy being who they are. They are surrounded by their families and have good lives. But, I’m sure there are some who wonder what it would be like to be white.
How would life be different? What opportunities would be available to them if the color of their skin was different. Racial discrimination in our country has been outlawed by statute but all too frequently bias is still there.
If being gay were a choice, who would choose it? Witness what has happened in Maine. The state legislature approved gay marriage and then the forces of arch-conservativism launched a referendum campaign and revoked it. Look at California, where gay marriage also was made law of the land and the Mormon Church decided it must intervene.
Who needs this? Who would want to be on the side who’s rights are being stepped on? In both cases ultra-conservative political action groups from outside of each state whipped up the fervor of gullible voters.
In Maine, it was Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council based in Washington D.C. In California, it was the Mormon Church from Utah. Wouldn’t you think a church would have something better to do with it’s money? Couldn’t they set up shelters for the homeless or give food to the hungry? Do something that Jesus would do?
Many people have a problem with the term “gay marriage.” Some would in fact support a legal bond between gay couples if it was called a civil union.
I felt the same way until I read an essay by Geoffrey R. Stone, a Professor of Law at the University of Chicago. Stone says: “The real question, then, is why some people are so hung-up about the definition of the word ‘marriage.’ If someone truly supports granting gays and lesbians ‘all the rights married people have,’ why would she bristle at throwing in the word that goes along with the rights? The point, of course, is that words do matter. Words can insult, degrade, shame, and hurt. Moreover, words shape reality. And in the same-sex marriage context, there can be no mistaking the implication of the use of a different word. It is, and is meant to be, insulting, degrading, shameful, and hurtful.”
Slowly but surely, our society is moving in the right direction. Four states now allow same-sex marriage: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa and Vermont. In January, it will be legal in New Hampshire.
From the Associated Press: “Washington state voted on whether to uphold or overturn a recently expanded domestic partnership law that entitles same-sex couples to the same state-granted rights as heterosexual married couples.”
That measure won.
In a story posted Nov. 5 on JSonline.com, the Milwaukee County Board approved extending domestic partner benefits to county employees. “The time is always right to do what’s right,” said Supervisor Christopher Larson, the chief author of the measure, “There is no question of where history is headed on this. We should not put off history for one more month.”
This is a question of civil rights. There was a time when it was taboo for people of different religions to marry. It was less than 50 years ago when there were still laws in the United States that forbid marriage between blacks and whites.
I believe my marriage is not threatened by gay marriage or gay unions or whatever we end up calling it.
— R.J. Johnson believes in equal rights for all. He can be contacted via e-mail at RJJohnsonSPEagle@gmail.com