Gay rights are a secular triumph
Tweet
While listening to a program about the overturning of California’s Proposition 8 on National Public Radio the other day, a caller brought up a point that has been on my mind for some time, and perhaps is the most important part of the whole debate over gay marriage.
The caller mentioned that the very fact the question of same-sex marriage has been introduced into the judicial sphere highlights a critical problem with modern American politics — something that quintessentially is a moral issue and wholly contained in the private sphere of life wrongly has become an issue of the public sphere.
Thus, the U.S. District Court’s ruling on Proposition 8 should be viewed as a victory for secularism and recognition of the rightful divide between the private and public spheres of human life — the former being the one in which the state should have no hand.
Whether an individual wishes to marry a person of the same sex or the opposite sex is a matter of concern between the prospective consenting partners. Such an action is of importance only in two individuals’ private sphere of life. The only point where the decision affects anything at all in the public sphere is when the state follows through on rights and protections granted to married couples.
Respect and recognition of the divide between the private and public spheres is one of the key elements of the modern secular state. This notion finds support in many parts of the U.S. Constitution and its amendments, in particular the First Amendment.
The First Amendment clearly states that the U.S. government cannot pass any laws establishing a national religion or giving preference to one faith over another. Preventing gay marriage would do exactly that. The founders of this nation were well aware of the private-public divide and the issues upon which the government rightfully could act. Same-sex marriage is not one of them.
The notion that same-sex marriage is morally wrong is essentially a religious conclusion. By proceeding from such a conclusion and enacting laws that, in essence, recognize the correctness of that opinion, the U.S. government would be integrating a theological argument into its constitutionally-mandated secular legal structure. Previously passed laws such as the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, of 1996 openly violate these provisions of the Constitution.
In fact, the section of DOMA that federally defined marriage as being between a man and a woman recently was struck down by a federal district court in July. Any attempt to force a personally held opinion about private life onto others while turning a private issue into a public one must be challenged and defeated whenever and wherever it appears. The repeal of Proposition 8 and Section 3 of DOMA are excellent indicators of progress on these problems.
The moral majority must not be allowed to exert their will and opinion on the minority simply because they are the temporal holders of legislative power.
Additionally, prohibition of same-sex marriage violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Equal Protection Clause establishes exactly what it sounds like — equal protection for all persons before the law.
Denying homosexuals the state-recognized right to marriage would fly in the face of this provision. The amendment was used in the past to defeat anti-interracial marriage laws that existed in certain states into the 1960s. We find ourselves in a similar struggle over marriage now.
I understand that certain collective moral precepts, like democracy, secularism and equality, can be considered just as subjective or private as a conception of marriage, but the fact that these three concepts form the foundation for rational political discourse and decision making must be recognized.
The boundaries between the realms of the private and public must be acknowledged as well. The will of some people as expressed through the government should be constrained by these “objective” political paradigms.
For the time being, they have won over misguided desires to force one group’s opinion upon the other. Hopefully, when these issues go before the Supreme Court, they will triumph again.
Matt Korovesis is a State News guest columnist. Reach him at koroves1@msu.edu.






Commentary
Add your $0.02, go to the comment form or follow the comment feed
OldTimer
(09/01/10 8:30am)Report
Committed couples in a faithful marriage do not get any new STD — barring medical accidents — so a premarital test is appropriate. Thereafter, monogamy protects personal and public health. Why would any sane person oppose the right to marry?
Thomas
(09/01/10 8:35am)Report
The above comment is a lie. Just one of many that the bigots spew. Funny how facts show that gays are just as capable as raising children, etc, etc. Funny how FACTS have a liberal slant isn’t it?
ApolloGenX
(09/01/10 10:06am)Report
The highest infection rate of HIV is in children in developing countries.
Does your hatred extend to children as well?
You’re an idiot and don’t deserve the rights you have been handed. It’s not surprising you are fighting to take away the rights of others. You are an enemy of liberty and a scourge to a free country.
TomInElPaso
(09/01/10 10:11am)Report
Sorry 50% but you’re dead wrong. Seems you forgot about the lesbians. Can you say 0%?
KABOOM, your foolishness just blew right up in your face.
NEXT!
Chuck Anziulewicz
(09/01/10 10:35am)Report
While it’s true that the Constitution doesn’t define “marriage,” the federal government has complicated the issue by taking a vested interest in married couples for the purposes of tax law and Social Security (among the 1,138 legal benefits, protections, and responsibilities that are automatically bestowed on couples once they marry). Therefore this is not an issue that can be left up to the states to decide individually, since it wouldn’t do for a Gay couple that is legally married in Iowa, for instance, to become automatically UN-married once they decide to move somewhere else.
Religious beliefs are irrelevant to this debate, because (1) the United States is not theocracy, and (2) churches will continue to be free to conduct or deny ceremonies to whomever they want.
Procreation and parenting are irrelevant, since (1) couples do not have to marry to have children, and (2) the ability or even desire to have children is not a prerequisite for getting a marriage license.
This is simply a matter of equal treatment under the law.
The quest for marriage equality by Gay couples has absolutely nothing to do with Straight (i.e. heterosexual) couples. Nothing is changing for them. Nothing is happening to “traditional marriage.” Most people are Straight, and they will continue to date, get engaged, marry and build lives and families together as they always have. None of that will change by allowing Gay couples to do the same. This is really not any sort of a “sea change” for marriage, since the only difference between Gay and Straight couples is the gender of the two persons in the relationship.
dseigler2
(09/01/10 12:52pm)Report
http://samesexmarriagescontinue.blogspot.com/
Hahahaha
(09/01/10 3:38pm)Report
@OldTimer
Look at the percentage of gays in committed (not having sex with anyone else) relationships vs. non-committed – You’ll see why the diseases continue to spread amongst them (and why the infection rates continue to rise, year after year!)
@Thomas
Let’s see those facts – Let’s see undeniable statistical proof that 2 people of the same sex are able to raise a kid that is able to deal with the world as it is, and effectively and normally reproduce, maintain normal interpersonal relationships, and make just as positive of an impact on the world as a child raised by normal (read:NATURAL) parents. MAKE SURE the statistics you quote use a STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT SAMPLE SIZE. (Hint: You won’t find any such statistics. Just a bunch of gays telling everybody that they can raise kids, whilst their HIV infection rates rise in the background).
@ApolloGenX
You stupid, stupid, STUPID person. STOP comparing apples to lawnmowers, and compare US homos to US heteros – BOTH GROUPS are given the same sex ed, the same opportunity to protect themselves from STD’s, yet the homosexuals infection rate is MANY magnitudes higher than ANY OTHER GROUP in this country, and that number continues to rise!!!! I don’t know why I even respond to you, your “kids in developing countries” comment was so idiotic, and typical.
@TomInElPaso
Oh really? Lesbians have a 0% infection rate? OK, let’s see some facts on that, and let’s stick to the point here, not your idiotic, snooty little comment here. The numbers I speak of are from the CDC, not some joke of a study that the homosexuals quote when they want to pretend they are normal, and no different than anyone else.
You people obviously don’t get it. Homosexual men demonstrate for all that homosexuality is a mental disorder, and should be treated the same way we treat an intravenous drug addiction – Intervention and treatment. Get them in a program before they take us down with them!!
Justin Lippi
(09/01/10 9:53pm)Report
Hahahaha,50%Question: What do you think a better way to teach people to be sexually safe is: 1) Tell them they should be ashamed for their sexuality, they are going to hell for it and that they are incapable of monogamous, loving relationships and shouldn’t even try. 2) Tell them that their sexuality is natural and healthy but they need to make sure to take care of themselves.
Keep in mind that people will have sex with people they are attracted to.
Now I realize both of you are pretty stupid, so now that I’ve asked the question, I insist on answering it: Taking route 1, people see sex as something forbidden and taboo and don’t have the tools to talk about safety and protect themselves. They even will go so far as to be unsafe because they think they deserve to be punished for that type of sex.
Route 2, on the other hand, is actually effective.
Now, Stop being so stupid. Read a book. Read “And the band played on”. Get a life and stop hating on gay people.
SJames6621
(09/02/10 1:44am)Report
Notice the hatefull comments, especially re HIV. 23 million people in Africa are infected with HIV, and hundreds of children are born with HIV every day in that awfully poor continent.
GAys are just the latest victims of people so bereft of their own sense of worth that they have to hate someone to make themselves feel good.
And their mania is fed by churches living in the past. Like the CAtholic church of Adoph Hitler, still not EXcommunicated. And the churches of the old south, who need someone new to hate, now that Blacks are taking their rightful place in society.
The bottom line is hatred is the true mental disorder of our time. Responsible for many wars, violence etc.
Virtually all of west. Europe except italy and greece grant gay people legal amrriage or a similar structure. To celebrate their love and committment.
Latin America is rapidly moving to the same situation as Mexico, Columbia and Argentina have gay marriage. And Equador, Uruguay, and Brazil have civil unions / domestic partnerships.
We as Americans should be ashamed of how far we are behind the rest of the western world in celebrating gay peoples love and committment.
We’ve been there before with marriage for blacks(1867, ending segregation, allowing women to vote, and ending laws banning inter-racial marriage.
Gay equality under the law is the social justice issue of our time.
Re: Justin Lippi
(09/02/10 9:29am)Report
Good GOD, are you still trying to justify homosexual promiscuity??? We are ALL given the SAME SEX ED and OPPORTUNITIES TO PROTECT OURSELVES FROM STD’S IN THIS COUNTRY. The difference: STD’s are out of control (and getting worse) in the homosexual community, while infection rates remain constant (and low) in the hetero community.
Don’t give me these lame “BUT WE ARE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST” stories. What, so, if someone tells me that guns are dangerous, I go shoot myself to prove them wrong?
You’re an idiot, and are a perfect example of the failure of US parents, and the US education system.
Get a life. Get your facts straight. Learn to deal with reality.
ALSO,
@SJames6621
What the hell? Are you still comparing apples to lawnmowers? Idiot. I hope you aren’t a student here, such idiocy should disqualify you from receiving any public education.
beau
(09/02/10 11:15am)Report
@HaHa, etc. Try Stanford Univ study using 2000 US census date that showed hetero/gay couples kids achiements are statistically the same. The biggest predictor of success was the level of education and wealth and not whether the parent couple was straight or gay. Hope 300 million is a large enough sample. Peace.
Justin Lippi
(09/02/10 1:29pm)Report
Actually, my facts are straight, and we aren’t given the same sex-ed opportunities because most places don’t teach about gay sex.
Not that even if that condition had been fulfilled would be justification for the public to turn its eyes to the ‘gay disease’
And none of this goes to show that I don’t take personal responsibility for protecting myself and expect others to as well.
You are a coward and a fool who can not even use his real name. The conversation is not worth continuing because you are not conversing so much as spouting off.
I’m willing to continue the conversation if you are willing to accept the topic is nuanced and that gays are people worthy of dignity and respect. Until then, take my advice and read a book like “and the band played on”, or find someone else who will listen. Maybe a 5-yr old, or someone in the Young Americans for Freedom.
Bill
(09/03/10 2:10pm)Report
To “Re: Justin Lippi”: First, a subject line is not a name. Use something different.
Second, STD trends in a particular demographic, even when compared against another demographic, is an absurd reason to oppose gay marriage. Millions of people believe in an invisible being because it comforts them, even though there is zero evidence of such a being’s existence, but does that mean that religion should be banned?
Lastly, your comment suggesting that those who lack knowledge should not be educated sounds a bit fascist.
Matt
(09/03/10 2:37pm)Report
If you want to get “married” so badly then go around the law. Buy some rings, hire a lawyer to draw up a contract and have one of you change your last name. After all, isn’t that what marriage does? If straights don’t want you to use the term “marriage” then find a way around it. No institution should have to change their ways to meet your demands.
Bill
(09/03/10 2:53pm)Report
@Matt – You’re ignoring one of the most significant benefits of marriage: Health benefits. No lawyer can draw you up a contract that forces employers to cover the spouses of gay people.
Re: Justin Lippi
(09/07/10 3:42pm)Report
ARE YOU KIDDING ME!??!?!?
Wow. No offense, dude, but you are an excellent candidate for natural selection. I wouldn’t be surprised if you already have HIV.
The very notion that there should be some “special” education for “gay sex” is not only offensive, it’s the stupidest idea I’ve ever heard.
SEXUAL CONTACT IS SEXUAL CONTACT. It ALL subjects you to risk of contracting STD’s. I see what you are doing here, though. You’re trying to justify the insanely high STD infection rates in the homosexual community by claiming that they aren’t properly educated. I’m sorry, but you are sadly mistaken. Attitudes like yours are the reason that the infection rates continue to rise, and I love how you claim that your “facts are straight”, yet if I asked you where you got those facts, you’d point to one of your gay friends or news sources.
Go to the CDC website. Look at the HIV infection rates for people like you. You might understand why I think it should be treated the same way as illegal intravenous drug use.
Also, Bill, NO. I will not use my real name. Why? Because as a straight white mail, I am a minority, and revealing my identity would no doubt subject me to discrinmination, death threats, etc. from the gay community. They would go unpunished, because they are a “protected group”, and I would be forced to go into hiding because there is no love for the SWM in this country anymore. You’ve got to be a “minority” to be anyone anymore.
F that. You keep destroying yourself and your kind, Justin. I’ll keep doing my thing, with the satisfaction that My behavior is Natural, and I can make a meaningful (and positive) contribution to this world.
Ed
(09/08/10 1:23pm)Report
Since you’ve invoked the word “secular” to describe the gay right’s movement, just wanted to point out that Evangelical Lutherans, PresbyteriansUSA, Episcopalians, UCC, UU, MCC, American Baptist, Jewish Reform and some Jewish conservatives and others – all support marriage equality for gay people.
Andrew
(09/10/10 4:51pm)Report
Question: Do gay people get turned on by looking at themselves in the mirror?? I would think that would make sense.
Ex: I am a gay male. I get turned on by attractive guys. I am a attractive guy. Therefore I get turned on by myself…right?? :)
I don’t understand those that choose to practice homosexuality…it just doesn’t make sense.