Gay Marriage

“Our Words Fail Us”

Language fails us when we speak of Marriage, Weddings, Civil Unions, Domestic Partnerships, Civil Rights, and Religious Rites. A quote in the Washington Post coverage of New York gay marriages on July, 25, 2011 captured an example of the problem. An opponent of gay marriage was quoted as saying, “To sanctify same sex marriage is an abomination.” Similarly, news commentators angrily denounced the California Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recent decision regarding Proposition 8 citing that marriage is “traditionally” heterosexual, or that heterosexual marriage is an “essential institution of society”. But, arguments about heterosexual marriage based on religion or tradition immediately raise the questions, “Whose religion?”, or “Whose tradition?”

States don't sanctify (dedicate as sacred) marriage, they authorize a legal union between two individuals. In fact, it is illegal for Sates or the Federal government to sanctify marriage or impose religious beliefs or “traditions” on the legal requirements for marriage. The First Amendment prohibits a preference for one religion over another, or religion over non-religion. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides equal protection for all people under the law. States can’t discriminate against gender in civil unions any more than they can discriminate on the basis of race or ethnicity. But, our language or terminology doesn't help us distinguish very well between a State authorized domestic contract between two people (sorry, it's not very romantic!) and a religious wedding, ceremony, tradition, or cultural ritual. As others have noted, our discussion often confuses civil rights with religious rites. What we have here is a failure to communicate!

States license marriage (domestic partnerships or civil unions) between two individuals, which bestows certain legal and social rights and benefits regarding property, other assets, taxes, inheritance, etc. State governments typically specify premarital requirements such as residency, waiting periods, blood tests, minimum age, and family relationships that must be met in order to marry. Likewise, states authorize civil and religious officials to perform marriage; judges, clerks of the court and justices of the peace, ministers, rabbis, priests, and others, thereby recognizing the wide array of marriage practices from very simple civil proceedings to elaborate religious ceremonies. Additionally, States typically stipulate both a marriage license as an authorization to marry and a marriage certificate to document that a marriage has taken place.

Weddings on the other hand are typically ceremonies that celebrate the union of a couple by family and friends. They may be religious or they may be entirely secular. Some religions have their own set of requirements for marriage in addition to what the Sate imposes, for example classes or instruction in the that particular religious tradition for marriage, waiting periods, and other forms of preparation. Religious wedding ceremonies vary greatly among traditions, cultures, countries, and social classes.

Apparently, a Muslim marriage is not considered a “sacrament”, but a simple, legal agreement in which either partner is free to include conditions that are stipulated in a written contract. The first part of the Nikah, the wedding ceremony, is the signing of the marriage contract itself. In Jewish law, marriage consists of two separate acts, called erusin, meaning sanctification, which is the betrothal ceremony, and nissu'in, the actual ceremony for the marriage. Erusin changes the couple's interpersonal status, while nissu'in brings about the legal consequences of the change of status.

In the Catholic religion and many other Christian denominations, marriage is considered a solemn sacrament, a Christian rite, holy matrimony. The priest or minister is authorized to perform a legally binding marriage in the eyes of the state and the legal union requires a license, but the ceremony is almost entirely religious. In fact, even if a couple subsequently gets divorced legally in the eyes of the State, they remain married in the eyes of the Catholic Church, unless the marriage is later annulled- by the Church. Various religions may or may not preclude gay marriage based on their belief systems and traditions- the State does not have a role in this determination. Weddings are ceremonies that mark the beginning of marriages or civil partnerships, but States don't require religious ceremonies to consummate a legal marriage.

Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde, the new Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Washington, wrote in the Washington Post on February 11, 2012, “The scriptural argument against same-sex marriage is based on seven references in the Old and New Testament that condemn homosexual activity. Each of those passages, however, condemns, exploitative sexual activity that is the antithesis of loving, committed relationships. The Bible is silent on the subject of same-gender, monogamous relationships.”1 Rev. Budde goes on to point out that those seven references, “pale in comparison with the overarching Biblical imperatives to love one another, work for justice and recognize that each of us is created in the image of God.”2

Perhaps the debate is evolving in some parts of the country. The Washington Post reports on February 13, 2012 (the day before Valentines) that some Maryland GOP lawmakers are wrestling with the, “. . .interplay between government and religion . . .”, during that state's consideration of a same-sex marriage bill. Del. Patrick N. Hogan, (R., Frederick), states, “I'm conflicted. While I believe we should provide couples rights, I don't know about using the word 'marriage'

Ironically this whole debate is about two people coming together in love and respect to form a commitment to one another, certainly core values of all religions. We need to distinguish the role of the State in licensing all civil unions or partnerships from weddings, which are religious or secular ceremonies. I can't speak for the various communities at the heart of this debate, and I'm not in favor of constitutional amendments, but one resolution would be for State legislatures to stipulate that the state licenses domestic partnerships, and that otherwise couples, once licensed are free to get married in the ceremony, secular or religious, of their choosing. Above all, let us be mindful, as we resolve this issue, of the first tenet of all major religions- to love one another and to treat one another with compassion.

1. and 2. “On Faith”, Washington Post, February 11, 2012


Happy Valentines Day!
Geoff
February 14, 2012