Joe Mroszczyk’s remarks are an obvious attempt to mask the endorsement of inequality. First of all, to suggest that gays and lesbians have not been discriminated against is ignorant. Sexual orientation affects a person’s chance of being hired or fired, accepted into housing, able to adopt a child, to immigrate to the United States, and to join the military etcetera. Being allowed access to over 1,000 rights and benefits of civil marriage is one of these “real civil rights.”
Mroszczyk argues that were gay marriage a true issue of civil rights, then the gay community would have the support of the black community. How can we possibly assume that a person would base their decision on this issue merely because they were once persecuted. We have to give people more credit than that. We cannot expect all minorities to support all other minorities based on this commonality. However, to go along with his point for a moment, Coretta Scott King, an avid black civil rights activist, does support gay marriage as do many others. Furthermore, to argue that because Reverend Jesse Jackson and the Black Ministerial Alliance do not support gay marriage means that it is not a civil rights issue is unwise. Clearly, these parties have a religious commitment that influences their opinions on the matter. Additionally, Clinton and Kerry’s opposition to gay marriage does not mean that Democrats and Republicans are both on that side. There are both Republicans and Democrats who also support this cause.
The “millennia-old institution” argument is overused and nonsensical. It’s true that marriage has been around for centuries, but marriage and familial roles are constantly undergoing change. Laws giving women equality with their husbands within marriage were still being passed in the 1930s. In 1965, the Supreme Court struck down the law against married couples using contraception. And it was just in 1967 that the Supreme Court deemed the law against interracial marriage unconstitutional. Alabama didn’t remove its constitutional provision against this until November 2000. This “basic foundation of human society” is not “at risk” because loving and committed couples want to be legally recognized. This institution is one of constant change throughout history and will not fall apart if same-sex couples are allowed in to it. The people who stand to suffer most are the gay couples who want to share a life and a family but are being denied that happiness. To align same-sex marriage with polygamy or incest reveals an underlying disgust toward homosexual couples a.k.a. homophobia.
To say that opposing gay marriage is “supporting the family” is an insult to the ideals of the family. Obviously, one would only be supporting some families and abandoning others. If Mroszczyk claims not to be “opposing gays as people,” he would recognize that their families are legitimate and just as capable of raising healthy and happy children as has been demonstrated by many same-sex couples. Family is about love, trust, intimacy and care, all emotions and ideals that same-sex couples are more than capable of honoring. Moreover, following his logic, single-parent families should be illegal.
Same-sex marriage does not belong on the ballot because it is a human right. Prager is right: Allowing the majority to decide on whether or not a minority should have access to their fundamental rights is not just. As Thomas Jefferson said in his first inaugural address in 1801, “Though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail that will to be rightful must be reasonable. The minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.”
Alissa Bachner alissab@bu.edu 973-204-0571 COM 2008
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
