STRAIGHT MARRIAGE SURVIVES!

Traditional marriage still intact
By Kelvin Wade August 12, 2010 7:06PM

Last week's decision by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker overturning Proposition 8 provided the handwriting on the wall in the gay marriage debate.

I think more and more people will realize the inevitability of gay marriage and will grudgingly accept it over time. Judging by the muted reaction to the decision last week, the struggling economy has worked to gay marriage supporters' advantage.

There are simply more pressing concerns for most people than whether Adam and Steve tie the knot.

Judge Walker dealt with the case in the way it should've been handled: as a secular function of government and not a religious morality play.

While it's legitimate for peoples' religious beliefs to guide their political judgments, the government shouldn't function as an arm of any religion. That separates us from the Taliban. A wise teacher once explained it this way: Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God, the things that are God's.

After all, government sanctions tolerate many things the church forbids or condemns. Fornication, cohabitation, adultery, pornography, gambling and divorce are all legal in California and condemned in the pulpit.

Judge Walker said the state cannot discriminate against a group just because that group is unpopular. No state interest is satisfied by barring gay marriage. He dismissed the procreation argument by pointing out the ability to procreate has never been a prerequisite of marriage.

Infertile couples and the elderly are allowed to marry. He could find no harm to heterosexual marriage by allowing homosexual marriage.

Massachusetts has had legal gay marriage for six years now, and we've seen none of the apocalyptic, society-shattering predictions from opponents materialize. Straight marriages haven't disintegrated.

In the 16 months since gay marriage has been legal in Iowa, more than 2,000 couples have tied the knot and the only thing hetero marriages needed defending from were the usual suspects: singles bars, the Internet and divorce.

Also, in the five states and the District of Columbia that allow gay marriages, not one person has attempted to marry an animal. There have been no movements to expand the definition of marriage to allow brothers and sisters to marry.

There have been benefits. According to a 2009 study by UCLA's Williams Institute, gay marriage injected more than $100 million in the Massachusetts economy. A similar study has shown that had California not passed Proposition 8, gay marriage would've brought in nearly half a billion dollars into the state.

Of course, such a huge societal change is scary to many. We're free to disagree with it. Our churches can oppose it like they oppose many other legal things in our society.

But in this case, Judge Walker could find no compelling reason the state should discriminate. And the practice of gay marriage across the country hasn't uncovered that reason either. Peace.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

ADDITIONAL NOTES: Looks like Judge Walker has allowed gay marriages to continue August 16th. The battle continues.

I used to oppose gay marriage. The church I grew up in disapproved. Still disapproves. So I'm sensitive to people who oppose gay marriage on religious grounds. I don't paint them as a bunch of haters, which a lot of supporters of gay marriage do. Many religious folks struggle with this, having gay friends and understanding the issue on the one hand but feeling they must uphold their religions' teachings.

My opposition to gay marriage wasn't rooted in religion, however. I was just opposed. Reading excellent works like "How We Decide" by Jonah Lehrer, "Blink" by Malcolm Gladwell and articles by Professor Jonathan Haidt has really opened my eyes to how people make decisions. We tend to make gut decisions on issues like this and then develop reasoning to try to support our gut decisions. I'm confident that a great deal of opposition to gay marriage is simply, "Ick." I think people are appalled at two men kissing and develop all kinds of reasons to oppose it when it just boils down to the fact that they're grossed out.

But really looking into the issue from a human rights, Constitutional perspective as well as thinking back to the gay friends I'd had and talking with a gay couple that lived next door changed my view.

I've written anti-gay marriage columns before but I knew my views were changing when I sat down to write one of those columns and I was destroying my own arguments in my head while writing. I had to sack the column. I couldn't write what I didn't believe.

To me, one has to divorce (no pun intended) how one may feel personally about gay marriage. The question isn't whether you like it or approve of it. The question is does the government have an interest in preventing it. Is a public policy aim achieved by preventing it? Do gay people not have the same rights as straight people? I submit someone can be opposed to gay marriage for whatever reason but still agree that the state must sanction it. The government cannot bar gay couples from marrying just because it makes you uncomfortable or will make it hard for you to explain it to your children.

Just like the government should allow gays to openly serve in the military, but that's a different column.

I don't understand the religious argument as far as the law goes. Those are two separate things. Gov. Jesse Ventura had it right. He said that the government should issue marriage license to everyone regardless of gender since it's a civil matter. Churches could decide what they want to do since that's a spiritual matter.

Allow me to rant a little bit: I don't understand this new Christian urge to create heaven on earth. This was never the instruction back when I attended the Church of Christ growing up. I was always taught that we were not supposed to be of this earth. I don't recall any teaching that it was our goal to make society reflective of our religion. The whole point of my religious upbringing was to make ME reflective of our religion. To me, church wasn't about building a better country but building better Christians.

End of that. Gay people should be allowed to marry like anyone else. It's a matter of fundamental fairness. It's a matter of due process and equal protection. Years from now, we will look back on all of this drama and wonder what the big deal was. There has been no harm done to hetereosexual marriages. Life has gone on and life will go on.