Posted by
Edwin Leap on Monday, January 12, 2009 11:43:56 AM
The next four years will likely be a time of cultural battle over same-sex marriage. Despite legislative victories like Proposition 8 in California, it's likely that judicial fiat will overrule the desire of the people. Worse, judicial rulings that overturn legislative bans on same-sex marriage summarily dismiss the ages old morality of West and East, as well as the learned morality and wisdom of the people. The people, incidentally, who are considered unwashed, barbaric, judgmental masses when the vote the wrong way, but enlightened instruments of change when they vote correctly; in presidential elections, for instance.
But in contemplating all of this, I've realized something. You see, there are often realities behind realities, and questions beyond questions. And the question I have to ask is this: if traditional morality is wrong, or oppressive, useless or outdated, then why the angst over same-sex marriage? I mean this: if homosexuals consider their activities to be morally reasonable because older forms of morality are outdated and pointless, then why does it matter if they are married or not?
Most persons, even most conservatives that I know, are willing to concede domestic partnership for the purposes of insurance, inheritance, next-of-kin, power of attorney and other such benefits and legalities. Given that, why does it matter if a gay or lesbian couple is considered married? Isn't marriage the domain of fundamentalists and right-wing conservative Christians? And, even so, aren't we always reminded that even Christians suffer from divorces in their marriages? Why does it matter at all?
I have a couple of ideas:
First, if national legislation deems same-sex couples married, then we all have to accept that legality. If you can't win hearts and souls, you can always legislate acceptance, I suppose.
Second, if such occurs, and others speak against it, they will be deemed purveyors of hate speech. So, tolerance of viewpoints and lifestyles will be ever-after a matter of fiat, not morality, not love, not true acceptance.
Third, and perhaps most controversial, everyone knows that old forms of morality aren't outdated and aren't worthless. They are of inestimable value. So, stricken with the internal dissonance that accompanies a lifestyle that is inherently in conflict with traditional morality and the traditional religions from which the morality springs, same-sex couples want to find a way to enjoy justification of their own lifestyles. 'Well look, I'm married, aren't I? I'm moral, aren't I? You can't judge me, can you?'
Well, yes, we can. We can love love them and must. We can protect them from injustice and violence, for this is our duty for every citizen. We can treat them as equal citizens, for they are and should always be. But we can judge what we consider an immoral activity and we can refuse to approve of it by granting it legal acceptance. This is not discrimination, but discretion. And if it is discrimination, then we can no longer use infidelity as an argument in divorce proceedings, because all of the old moral orders that concern relationships and marriage will be apparently considered defunct.
So, the next time someone asks you about gay marriage, ask them this question: 'Why does it matter?'
I think it's a very relevant question.