On marriage, justice and equality

Few things rub me the wrong way as much as injustice and inequality.

Denying rights to a minority when those same rights are enjoyed by the majority is, by definition, unequal and unjust.  It's that simple.

Marriage is a right that is clearly entitled to the majority in this country.  Some would deny that same right to a minority, that minority being those who would participate in same-sex marriages.

The judges of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals acted properly on February 7 in rendering their decision against California's Proposition 8--the referendum that sought to deny the right of same-sex marriage.  Understandably, many supporters of Proposition 8 are unhappy with this event.  I know some of these people, and can vouch that they are of good conscience and sound mental faculties, so there is hope that they can be convinced to change their minds.  Perhaps my meager written thoughts can contribute to that change.



Religion and faith seem to play a big part in the objections to same-sex marriage.  Perhaps it is the fundamental cause for these objections.  We hear it in political campaigns and political talk-shows, as well as in every-day conversation.  And, apart from the rhetoric, there are people who honestly believe that marriage has religious qualities that preclude same-sex unions.

Nonetheless, I ask those same people with religious concerns to be supporters of same-sex marriage.  Justice and equality have a place in religion, too.  And, laws that support justice and equality will also provide room for the faith-based practices of religion.

This essay is in no way a religious argument on this subject, only a secular one.  Equality of justice will be achieved when the civil authority is empowered to issue a gender-neutral marriage license, and when the mechanism is in place that will enable the final document to be properly recorded after completion of the needed ceremony.  Some ministers or pastors or priests or clergy will choose to officiate over a same-sex marriage, and some will choose to not officiate; those who choose to not officiate will probably do so for a variety of reasons.  Currently, some of these same people will choose not to officiate over certain man-woman marriage ceremonies, and those choices are for a variety of reasons.  There is no overly-broad legal compulsion to conduct a ceremony, whether it is same-sex or between a man and a woman.    From the standpoint of religion and faith, it's business as usual.

We have been through similar debates before, always with the same outcome.  In past experiences with injustice and inequality, the majority caused legal denial of rights to minorities as defined by race, ethnicity, skin color and sometimes other attributes.  Eventually, we realized that those actions conflicted with our society's foundations of equality and justice.  Those abuses are history.  National policy in the form of judicial decisions, legislative action and subsequent enforcement measures caused that to happen.

As things stand now, same-sex marriage is to be decided on a state-by-state basis.  There ought to be some type of nation-wide action that makes it clear that marriage is a legal right that is evenly-available to all people.  Perhaps that will happen if the advocates for Proposition 8 in California decide to appeal to the US Supreme Court.  For the moment, the 9th Circuit's decision applies only to California.  The Los Angeles Times published a comprehensive article on the court's decision on February 8; the online version includes links to additional background information and the status of same-sex marriage in other states.  You can see the whole thing by clicking here. 

It always seems worthwhile to take a look at the U.S. Constitution when matters of justice and equality are on the table.  The 14th Amendment is succinct on this matter -- in Section 1 it says, in part, "No state shall. . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."  Here's a link to the Amendment as it appears in the web site of the National Archives and Records Administration.

If it seems to somebody that Amendment 14 does not make a clear statement on this subject, then I would appreciate hearing about this and learning why it does not.

In this country, religion and the law are--thankfully--two separate things.  Both help people.  Each should do what it does best.  What the law does best is protect, support and ultimately ensure justice and equality.  That's what it is intended to do.  It should do this for same-sex marriage just as it has done so for all other civil rights.