| SUBSCRIBE | | Why we charge |
|
|
|
Front Page
opinion guest_columns
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Many Folks Out West Find Gay Marriage Acceptable
By Ned Farquhar
Of the Journal
Out West, you get to live your life. People push back against needless government intervention. Even the liberals have a libertarian streak. You do what you want, except if your actions harm someone else.
Maybe that's why Arizona voters rejected a ban on gay marriage in 2006, and California's Supreme Court recently recognized gay marriage, and people in Seattle are outraged that an usher at a baseball game told a lesbian couple to quit making out in public.
By coincidence, at a baseball game two weeks ago, my wife and I sat near a gay couple who had their arms around each other. I asked her whether she felt threatened by the gay couple's hugging. No, she said. Suppose they got married in California, I asked. She thought for a moment, and said no, she wouldn't really know whether they were married and couldn't think how their marriage would threaten ours.
So we sat there, watching the Albuquerque Isotopes lose, and pondered gay marriage.
The first thing that came to mind was that people deserve respect and fairness in their personal lives. Why should gay people be second-class citizens?
If marriage is so meaningful to those who oppose gay marriage, it must be equally meaningful to those who are denied the opportunity to marry. To my wife and me (like many who oppose gay marriage) marriage is central, crucial in our lives. We couldn't see denying anyone else the right to build their lives on marriage, if they wish.
What about the nature of marriage? Though some people have a moral or religious objection to gay marriage, marriage is a civil institution. When heterosexual couples get married in a civil ceremony without religion, do they threaten another more religious person's marriage? Suppose someone gets married in a religion other than mine, at which the guests slaughter a goat or crush a glass or claim God's exclusive recognition of their union, compared to mine. Is that a threat to our marriage?
No. At least that's how we feel.
There's the Bible. The Old Testament is cited by some Christians who condemn homosexuality as a sin and oppose gay marriage, but it was also used to justify slavery. The New Testament, of course, is about Christ, who was silent on the subject of homosexuality, called for tolerance and love, and preached that only God should sit in judgment. Our society is founded on religious non-discrimination; using the Bible against gay marriage isn't really kosher anyway.
Then we discussed other types of marriage — interracial, for starters. A white person marrying a black one was illegal in dozens of states until the Supreme Court decided four decades ago that interracial heterosexual couples could marry. A strict constructionist, reading the Constitution literally as do some of today's Justices, would not find anything in the Constitution banning gay or interracial marriage. Ironically those strict constructionist judges also seem to be the ones most likely to limit the rights of consenting adults. Too bad, we thought: the U.S. Supreme Court is unlikely to protect people's rights — at least if they're gay.
We recalled that Newsweek recently quoted the al-Qaida terrorist Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, saying he seeks the destruction of the United States for allowing homosexual marriage. In our household we find little agreement with “KSM” on any topic. We tend instead toward tolerance, acceptance, and freedom.
My wife and I thought about children. Is a man-woman marriage favorable to children? That's a stumper. You can't generalize. We know gay couples who are raising great kids and don't care about their kids' sexuality — they just want their kids to be who they are. We also know horrible parents in heterosexual marriages, or who have divorced. No decision.
Is society somehow morally weakened by homosexuality? We wondered. There seem to be larger threats to society than people who love each other. (Maybe commercials that glorify casual sexual contact or murder, broadcast during family shows like baseball games?) For some, homosexuality is a deep moral concern. For others, the denial of the right to marry is immoral.
By now, my wife and I were thinking people who should be able to live their lives with the same opportunities and respect that people like us do.
Opportunity. Respect. They underlie our whole Western community and self-image. Gay people should be able to marry like anybody else.
Ned Farquhar is a former senior policy adviser to Gov. Bill Richardson. The views expressed are his own. E-mail: inthewest@comcast.net.
Albuquerque Journal Subscriber Services
Submit a news tip | Place a classified ad | Advertise Online at ABQjournal | Advertise in Albuquerque Journal print products | Subscribe to newspaper
Save & Share
Tag this Page
| 
...go to bookmarks
E-mail Story
Print Friendly
Send E-mail
Reprint story
