California’s passage of Proposition 8 was a great loss for the gay rights movement. Supporters of same-sex marriage hoped to snag a win in the liberal stronghold and gain strong footing in their national campaign to legalize gay marriage. But 52 percent of California’s population didn’t agree that marriage is an institution that should be shared with everybody.
The issue has largely been a Constitutional one, but it’s also prompting many Americans to question what marriage really means and, more intrinsically, what equality means. Those who feel that their own heterosexual marriages are threatened by the consideration of same-sex marriages deny their fellow Americans the joys of lifelong, legally recognized relationships. Logistically speaking, their hostility toward same-sex partners defines the way that same-sex partners are able to live their lives.
Two dear friends of mine who are of the same sex have been together for nearly a decade. In 2003, they were symbolically joined in a commitment ceremony. More than a year later, one was attacked with a knife in what was believed to be a hate crime. He was seriously injured and required surgery to repair internal damage. Once notified of the attack, his partner rushed to the emergency ward but was denied access to his partner’s room because he was not a family member (when asked by hospital staff if he was a relative, he curtly replied, “Not in George Bush terms”). He was not kept informed of progress during the invasive surgery, nor was he able to collect his beloved’s wallet, keys or cell phone. He knew nothing of his partner’s condition until long after the surgery was finished and could not see him until normal visiting hours. He had no rights to determine what course of action would be taken in the event of emergency during the surgery. His relationship didn’t qualify as legitimate under the mandate of the majority in this country, despite the exigent circumstances.
In a recent U.S. News and World Report article, advocacy attorney Evan Wolfson said, “There’s something deeply wrong with putting the rights of the minority up to a majority vote. If this were being done to almost any other minority, people would see how un-American this is.” Wolfson’s point is an essential one. In times when minorities were denied rights, the majority stood against them, firmly in the wrong.
As Americans, we tout our country’s commitment to equality and human rights, but are often slow to participate in progress. In the past, Americans have been swayed by extreme events. Revolutions and popular movements have been the way to get things done when injustice is challenged. Today, we look back at an oppressive history with remorse; only a tiny fragment of society would claim to support the discriminatory statutes of yesteryear.
So how is it that we’ve gotten to an age of globalization, technology and widespread higher education but are moored in the archaic white-bread beliefs that marriage is only sacred when it exists between a man and a woman? America is home to nearly 300 million people of countless different lifestyles, and yet the government recognizes only some of them, allowing biblical standards of love to write our canons of liberty.
We must continue to fight for rights across the country. We can start here at UT by lobbying the adminstration and the Legislature for domestic partner benefits to prove that the University and America are as progressive as their doctrines claim.
Staggs is an English senior.
