Contact: Facebook.

I Finally Got It!

A Reflection on Gay Marriage

by Jim Andris

What made me so blind to the plain truth? I mean, I was a gay activist for years! I had my own radio show. I was on the boards of numerous gay and lesbian organizations. I walked or marched as appropriate in all the Pride celebrations. I took young gays and lesbians under my wing and counseled them. I wrote scads of articles on gay pride and gay rights. I wrote gay love songs. I had a "holy union" in an episcopal church with my partner, Stephen. I helped him raise his daughter through high school and beyond.

People gave testimonies on how much I had helped them to see that gay was good. I was very clear, too, on what would be an adequate affirmative action program at the University. They Were wanting to give Stephen library and gym privileges, and I was wanting survivor's benefits for him. My city, St. Louis, was wanting to give us hospital visitation privileges, and I was wanting to file a joint federal income tax return with him. I was a liberal, for heaven's sake.

So how could I be so blind? You must be curious by this time. I was blind to the fact that permitting gays and lesbians to marry is a civil rights issue. Or at least I had cataracts around this issue. I was blind to the fact that these DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) laws are manifestations of little but pure and unadulterated bigotry. Or at least I had only 20/100 vision on this issue. I said things like, ok, we'll take gay marriage or we'll take domestic partnerships. Just as long as our legal right are protected. Yes, "was blind, but now I see.

On Bigotry

This resistance to gay marriage; it boils down to bigotry. And while I don't want to get lost in the semantics of a word, I'd like to remind you at the start of this discussion that the definition of a bigot is "a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudice." On that definition or any other meaningful definition of the word, preventing two people of the same sex from marrying each other is based on bigotry.

You know, it's a shocking thing to think that you're being good, and then suddenly see in a different light that you are doing just the opposite, evil. These people that are fighting so hard to keep same-sex couples from marrying, many of them actually believe that they are saving society. They believe that they are doing good, preventing evil. All these arguments that are launched against gay and lesbian marriage, if they were true and accurate, would prove the point: marriage is for procreation, God forbids it, society would fall apart. The problem is that the arguments are not true and accurate. In fact, they are rationalizations of bigotry.

Because, you see, there is nothing wrong with same-sex relationships. If you have reservations of any kind, you are a bigot on the issue. It is in fact just like slavery. If you have any reservations on this, you are a bigot on this issue. Let's try to see why this is. The same principle holds in both cases. It is simply wrong to own another person. It means that the slave has no choice but to do the will of the owner. Forbidding same-sex marriage is just a form of slavery to a highly questionable standard: that people must save their most intimate sharings for people of the opposite sex.

On Separate But Equal

But can't we "preserve the sanctity of marriage" and still permit gay and lesbian people to have intimate relationships? Can't we have "domestic partnerships?" Not if we want to have a just society. Nor can we have two "separate but equal" school systems. That, as it is now well-recognized, is a fiction, based on the hidden assumption that the superiority of one race demands separation. The Supreme Court has said that separate educational systems are "inherently unequal." Most people now recognize the essential correctness of this decision. Domestic partnerships for gays and lesbians and marriage for straight people is equally based on the fiction that one kind of sex is superior to another kind of sex.

You know, there is an occupational hazard to setting yourself the goal of leading the life of maintaining tradition. We good people, we forget that we have human limitations. We forget that humility is always called for. Instead, deep in our mind somewhere, we do-gooders think that surely after all these years of being good, after having a family that has been good for literally centuries, surely those
other people that do it a different way can't also be just as good as us. Right. The formula applies again: the other races and religions must be more primitive, the other sex must be weaker, the other kind of sex must be, well, not of God.

My pity goes out to the maintainers of tradition who have seen this point, and have still decided towage a war on gay marriage. They have simply given up all pretense of morality and have opted for a form of genocide. This is what I have come to see more clearly, that for many of the opponents of gay marriage, behind the pretense of morality lies a basical-ly selfish attitude: we deserve it (because blah, blah, blah) and you don't (because blah, blah, blah). Because we are better than you (because blah, blah, blah). The "blah, blah, blah" has been used to defend slavery, and suppression of women, jews, blacks, and gays and lesbians. And EACH time, the blah-blah- blahers have said, no, this is not like that, this is different. We really are right here. How dare you compare this with that?

On Privacy

But it is in the privacy area that we can get a clearer fix on what, if anything, is unique about the issue of gay marriage. Getting married puts up a wall of privacy around the married parties. What is clear is that whatever you do or don't do with another person, including sexual interaction, if there is any place you can do it, it is when you are married. What married partners do or don't do in the bedroom, bathroom, living room, basement, attic, or play room is nobody's business. It's private. And don't you see that this is the real issue for the DOMA proponents? It isn't that marriage will be degraded by same-sex marriage, it's that same-sex marriage will be elevated—to the spherre of privacy. The last place to stand and shout, "No, you cannot come in." would be gone.

But, finally, it is when we begin to examine in public what people might do in private, or might not do in private, that the light goes on. Let's just stick to opposite-sex marriages for a minute. A married man and woman might just sleep together without having sex, for one night, for a few nights, or forever after. They might sleep in separate bedrooms, but have sex in the kitchen. Or they might sleep in the kitchen. A man and a woman, one or both of them sterile, or past fertile years, might have sex, might not have sex. A married man and a woman might have oral sex. Or anal sex. A man might suckle a woman's breasts. She might suckle her own breast. Alright, so you've had enough. So have I. Bur the point is not to describe what goes on in a heterosexual marriage. It's precisely the opposite. The point is about why we DON'T describe this sphere of privacy. We don't describe it because ANYTHING or NOTHING can go on and it's nobody's business. Without a sphere of privacy, life becomes impossible, because government becomes dictator- ship.

The other point is that when you start looking really carefully at the possible sexual acts that can go on between a man and a woman, or two men, or two women, all this sex starts looking very similar. It starts becoming unclear why it is that straight people should be permitted to get married and gays and lesbians not permitted. Oh, the procreation argument. Say, I'm SURE I'm not the first to point this our, bur we DO let sterile or infertile heterosexuals get married, even though no natural children can ensue. Procreation is not THE ONLY reason to get married. How could anyone even think that? It is ONLY ONE of the reasons to get married. Procreating is not a necessary or a sufficient condition for getting married.

On God. Not!

Bur you haven't talked about God, about the Bible, you say! Of course not. This is a democracy. There is separation of church and state, one of the wisest things done in forming this country. Earlier in this article I identified an occupational hazard for believing that one has led a good life: a lack of humility when contemplating others whose lives differ significantly from those doing the contemplating. Nowhere are we humans MORE in need of and LESS in possession of humility than in contemplating the religious beliefs, or lack of them, of others who differ from us. And our founding ancestors, realizing that we did nor possess an appropriate amount of humility concerning such a controversial subject, built a protection into the constitution.
At the level of government, no one has to bring God into the picture. In fact, it is unconstitutional for the government to take sides on religious issues. While we may speak about them publically, if and when we wish, these are private matters, meaning the government, and the politicians that it rode in on, may not enter into them.

On Gay Marriage

Much has been made of the rights and privileges, the protections of marriage. I need not go into this matter, and would not do a better job than has been done already. I will simply say that there is NO successful criterion or reason that has yet been offered for distinguishing marriage as a specifically heterosexual phenomenon. That is, no criterion except the obvious one, that, well, gays are just different from straights, never mind how. And that my friends and enemies, is EXACTLY what it is to be a bigot. I challenge anyone to produce another criterion that somehow shows that gays should not be married, other than the plainly bigoted one that we are different. If you propose one, I'll either give you a counter-example or show you that justice rules it our. I've been reading these arguments for decades, and there is not one reason that can be offered that is both accurate and just.

On Knowing When To Give Up And
Work On Your Own Deficiencies

I long ago admitted I was a racist. And a sexist. I just got too much racist and sexist conditioning as a child to ever be completely free of it. I work very hard to minimize my own racist and sexist and classist attitudes, bur like the recovering alcoholic, I can never stop the work. One day at a time. But at least I know I have a problem. At least I know enough to occasionally keep my mouth shut and listen.
I also knew I was a homophobe. That is why when I was in high school, I made fey jokes about other guys who were allegedly effeminate. That is why it took me until age 32 to come out. That is why it took me until age 65 to finally get it. I finally got it. Resistance to gay and lesbian marriage is bigotry.

If you are opposed to gay marriage, maybe it is time that you gave up and started working on your own deficiencies: your lack of humility in the face of growth and change, your homophobic attitudes. Maybe it is time for you to occasionally keep your mouth shut and listen.