Same-sex couples take wedding vows seriously
Changing laws gets ball rolling toward equal rights for gays
By Matt Pearson
I am writing to strongly support Peter Dell’s viewpoint ("Let
wedding bells ring in gay community," March 1) in favor of
legalizing same-sex marriage, and to encourage the UCLA community
to oppose Assembly Bill 1982 and similar legislation in other
states.
There is a great deal of hysteria and propaganda surrounding the
issue of same-sex marriage, and as events unfold in Hawaii and
elsewhere, things will continue to heat up. The call for
legalization of same-sex marriage comes at a time when American
society is re-evaluating the nature of families and reconsidering
the meaning and importance of marriage.
In earlier times, marriage was primarily an economic
institution, which had more to do with the begetting of children
and the transfer of property than with the feelings and emotional
needs of the couple.
But now that traditional notion is eroding in favor of other
ideas. Various effects of that erosion (such as the rising divorce
rate and the seeming proliferation of single-parent households) are
viewed by many with alarm. This view led to a backlash against
so-called "nontraditional" families, in favor of a more rigid
"two-parent" model of the family – a model which has its basis more
in popular mythology and religious ideology than in historical
fact.
Yet even as we debate the meaning of family and marriage, it’s
important to remember that the question of whether same-sex unions
should be legally recognized is not about our personal beliefs, but
about basic human rights.
Our society has chosen to invest married couples with important
civil rights and responsibilities in areas such as medical
insurance, hospital visitation, adoption and inheritance, yet it
denies those rights to certain individuals just because their
relationship is with someone of the same sex. As a society, we
don’t need to have a unified view of marriage to recognize that
this is discrimination.
Though Pat Robertson and Pat Buchanan may claim otherwise, this
country was NOT founded on so-called "Christian morality." Rather,
it was founded on the idea that all people are created equal, and
that they are endowed with certain inalienable rights, including
the right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." When
same-sex couples are denied the privileges of legally recognized
marriage, then their inalienable right to pursue happiness is
infringed upon. This is un-American.
Of course, the debate over same-sex marriage is not really about
principles, but about emotions: In the end, opposition to gay
marriage stems from an ignorance about the true nature of
sexuality, coupled with fear of the unknown: To many – perhaps most
– Americans, gay people are viewed as promiscuous, sex-crazed
individuals who are inherently incapable of forming stable
relationships. The idea that a man or a woman can actually love
someone of the same sex and seek a committed, long-term union with
that person, is for many people, simply unthinkable.
Given this misconception, it’s understandable why many people
consider the very notion of same-sex marriages to be, at best, a
sick joke, and at worst, a genuine perversion of sacred social
institutions.
How can we, as gay and bisexual people – together with our
sympathetic straight allies – combat this kind of deep-rooted
prejudice? Gaining legal recognition for same-sex marriage will not
put an end to homophobia, or make gay relationships any more
acceptable to the majority of Americans.
Changing the laws is a start, but in the end, we must change
people’s minds; we must convince society at large that love takes
many forms, and that it is the limitation of diversity – not the
embracing of diversity – which poses the real threat to the
survival of the American family.
Pearson is a graduate student of linguistics.Comments to
webmaster@db.asucla.ucla.edu