HOMOSEXUAL (SAME-SEX) MARRIAGES

Background

The vast majority of couples form heterosexual families; a minority form homosexual families. But only the former can legally marry in most jurisdictions. And marriage brings with it many dozens of benefits.

Who May Not Marry?

• from different tribes,
• from the same tribe
• of different races
• of a particular race
• of different religions
• infertile
• developmentally handicapped
• of the same sex

Some examples:

• In the past, before slavery was outlawed, Afro-Americans were prohibited from marrying under any circumstances.
• In the US, miscegenation laws were once enforced in many states. e.g. in Virginia

  "All marriages between a white person and a colored person shall be absolutely void without any decree of divorce or other legal process." (Code Ann. =A7 20-57)

  In a most ironically named case "Loving v. Virginia" an inter-racial married couple was convicted of a felony under this law in 1958. They could have received a 5 year prison term; instead, they were "merely" exiled from their home state for 25 years. Part of the judge's ruling was:

  "Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races show that he did not intend for the races to mix."

  The couple appealed to the US Supreme Court which overturned the Virginia law and similar miscegenation laws of 15 other states in 1967.

• In 1996, the Roman Catholic Church forbade a church marriage because the husband-to-be was a paraplegic, and thus presumably could not engage in sexual activity. The couple was free to be married outside of their faith.

Countries Which Have Taken Action on Same-Sex Relationships

• Canada: A private member's bill was introduced into the Federal Parliament on 1996-APR-26 which would recognize same-sex partnerships and guarantee them the same rights as are given to heterosexual married couples. Historically, such bills are almost never passed.
• Cambodia: On 1995-MAR-12, two lesbians (Pum Ethwere & Khav Sokha) were legally married in Kro Bao Ach Kok village in Kandal province. 95% of Cambodians follow Theravada Buddhism.
• Denmark: They have recognized and registered about 3,000 homosexual partnerships since 1989 and guarantee them many of the rights and responsibilities previously restricted to heterosexual couples.
• France: They have a national health insurance plan which covers the partners of civil servants (and perhaps others).
• Hungary: Following a decision by the Constitutional Court on 1995-MAR-8, same-sex partnerships are now given the same rights and responsibilities as heterosexual common-law partners.
• Iceland: On 1996-JUN-27, their Althing (Parliament) approved a bill which gives gays and lesbians the right to marry in a civil ceremony which is recognized by the state. Margaret Olafsdottir, who leads the Association of 78 (the country's gay rights movement), said "This will revolutionize the lives of the gay couples in Iceland who have, until now, had to suffer great inequality in matters regarding insurance, taxes and the rights to inherit from one's partner....This injustice has, in the past, led to many personal tragedies.". Shared custody of children is permitted if one of the spouses has a child when they are married. But the law does not allow them to adopt children or practice artificial insemination. Three couples (two gay and one lesbian) were married in the Reykjavic central registry office immediately after the bill was passed. Whether by accident or intention, the bill was approved during Gay Pride week.
• Sweden: Register gay and lesbian partnerships.
• Greenland: Register gay and lesbian partnerships.
• Norway: Same as Denmark (since 1996).
• Netherlands: Register gay and lesbian partnerships in over 100 Dutch cities. However, there is concern that third parties (e.g. insurance companies) cannot be forced to recognize these registrations as equivalent to marriage. The Dutch cabinet has appointed an independent committee of experts to study the situation. They are expected to turn in their report during 1997. The Dutch cabinet will base its stand on the committee's recommendations.
• Sweden: Register gay and lesbian partnerships.
• Spain: Same as Denmark (since 1996).
• Slovenia: The Federal Government's Bureau for Women's Politics announced on 1996-MAR-23 that same sex marriages should be available within two years.
• United States: About 20 cities offer registration of same-sex relationships. However, they carry little or no legal worth.

Recent Developments in Hawaii

In 1993, three same-sex couples (Ninia Baehr, Genora Dancel, Tammy Rodrigues, Antoinette Pregil, Pat Lagon and Joseph Melilio) applied for marriage licenses from the State of Hawaii. They were refused. They then challenged the state's decision in court. This set in motion a chain of events:

• the case was appealed to the Hawaii Supreme Court (action #15689) which ruled on 1993-MAY-27 that the state's refusal to grant marriage licenses was unconstitutional. It violated the Hawaiian Constitution's equal protection guarantees (Article I, Section 5) against gender discrimination. The court remanded the case to the Circuit Court, stating that licenses should be issued to same-sex couples, unless the state can show a compelling interest in banning such marriages.
• The Hawaiian Legislature passed a bill in 1994 stating that the state's policy is that marriage must only be permitted between a man and a woman. They also decided that only the Legislature (not the courts) should make any change in this policy.
• A Commission on Sexual Orientation and the Law was established in 1995. They issued a report on 1995-DEC-9. Attempts were made by conservative elements within the Legislature to suppress the report. The Commission recommended by a 5 to 2 vote that same-sex marriages be legalized, or (as a backup) there be a comprehensive domestic partnership law created to handle homosexual unions.
• The Roman Catholic and Mormon Churches formed the "Hawaii Future Today" organization to resist same-sex marriages. A second religious group is called the "Alliance for Traditional Marriage".
• A resolution was proposed in the Hawaiian Legislature that would allow same-sex "domestic partnerships". The belief is that such a law might persuade the courts that full marriage rights for homosexuals were not needed. The bill appears to be stalled.
• A proposal to amend the Hawaii Constitution to allow discrimination against gays and lesbians was proposed, to be voted upon at the next election in the fall of 1996. It appears to be stalled in the legislature.
• Randall Terry of Operation Rescue (an activist pro-life abortion group) visited Hawaii to oppose "Godless" same sex marriages. He predicted that they would bring God's judgment upon the State of Hawaii and upon the rest of the United States. Local groups who also oppose homosexual marriages rejected Terry's rhetoric, and "his message of homophobia and intolerance".
• A Hawaiian trial court is scheduled for 1996-AUG to decide whether the state has a compelling interest to continue the ban on same sex marriages. The decision will probably be appealed to the Supreme Court of Hawaii which would probably issue its final ruling in 1997. The Mormon Church asked to be allowed to intervene in the trial. Their argument was that the state would be unable to represent the interests of the Church. They also are concerned that if same sex marriages are legalized, and the Mormon clergy refuse to conduct marriage ceremonies, that their state license could be revoked. The state Supreme Court rejected their request, and stated that their license argument was without merit; the state had never forced a minister to marry a couple. If, as expected, the state fails, then gay and lesbian couples will be able to obtain marriage licenses in Hawaii.

Implications for the Rest of the United States

The Constitution of the United States requires each state to give "full faith and credit" to laws made by the other states. If Hawaii legalizes same-sex marriages, and a couple is married in that state, then the remaining 49 states are required to recognize the marriage. However, if a state passes a law expressly prohibiting same-sex marriages before they become available in Hawaii, then they would not be compelled to recognize the marriage.

By early 1995, such bills were introduced in a few of states; the number had risen to 18 by 1996-MAR. Utah became the first state in the union to ban homosexual marriages. This was followed by Idaho and South Dakota in 1996. As of 1996-APR-4, a bill was passed in Georgia and is awaiting the signature of the governor. You may wish to read the text of a speech given in the Iowa House by Ed Fallon.

Notwithstanding the "full faith and credit" clause, it is unlikely that many states would willingly recognize same-sex marriages contracted in other states. Up until 1967 when the miscegenation laws were declared unconstitutional, many states refused to recognize inter-racial marriages that were made in other states. Couples had to fight for their rights on a state-by-state basis. It is probable that the same phenomenon would occur in the future over same-sex marriages.

Religious Polarization

• The Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund has joined with other gay and lesbian groups and proposed The Marriage Resolution:
  

  Because marriage is a basic human right and an individual personal choice, RESOLVED, the State should not interfere with same-gender couples who choose to marry and share fully and equally in the rights, responsibilities, and commitment of civil marriage.

• A conservative religious group have proposed a conflicting resolution:
  

  WHEREAS marriage is an essential element in the foundation of a healthy society, and WHEREAS government has a duty to protect that foundation, RESOLVED, the State should not legitimize homosexual relationships by legalizing same-sex "marriage" but should continue to reserve the special sanction of civil marriage for one man and one woman as husband and wife.

As in the case of abortion and many other hot religious topics, same-sex marriages are matters of personal freedom and choice. Both sides use very different terminology. Conservative religious groups talk in terms of a threat or attack on the traditional family; gay and lesbian groups talk about extending equal rights to homosexuals, and making the definition of "family" more inclusive.

Frankly, we find the position of conservative Christian "pro-family" groups to be confusing. They claim to be in favour of traditional family values, such as love, mutual support, commitment, monogamy, and the potential for raising children in a loving environment. If they really did support these values, then one would expect that they would eagerly promote gay and lesbian weddings along with the more conventional heterosexual weddings. After all, marriage has always been the main institution promoting family values. One would expect them to be among the loudest supporters of both heterosexual and homosexual marriages.

There is a lot of fuzzy thinking with regards to same-sex marriages. Many opponents act as if:

• our present view of nuclear marriage has always been the dominant one. In fact, in some societies [including ancient Israel] there were many forms of legitimate relationships:
  • some marriages were and/or were polygamous
  • some marriages were considered an exchange of property in which total control of the woman was formally transferred from her father to her husband.
  • Leverite Marriages existed in Biblical times in which a man had an obligation to marry his brother's wife if his brother died.
  • men engaged in sexual relations with one or more concubines
  • men engaged in sexual relations with their slaves
• the nuclear heterosexual family has always been the basic building block of society. (In reality, the extended family was the norm in the 19th century; this evolved into the nuclear family. In the 1990's, single parent families have become quite numerous.)
• there is only a limited amount of love and commitment available in each area. So, if homosexual couples are allowed to fall in love and make commitments, then there might not be enough left over for the heterosexuals.
• there are only a certain number of marriage licenses printed each year, and that if homosexual couples were allowed to marry, there might not be enough licenses left over for the heterosexual couples
• that if homosexuals are allowed to marry, they will raise children who will also be homosexuals
• a homosexual committed loving couple at 100 Main Street is a massive threat to a heterosexual committed loving couple at 102 Main Street. That extending dental and medical coverage to the non-working spouse at 100 Main Street will somehow cause the couple at 102 to be more likely to divorce.

None of the above is true. In reality, opposition to same-sex marriages is based upon invalid fundamental beliefs about sexual orientation - that it is:

• sexual orientation is a choice that is made perhaps during teenage years
• it can be altered by therapy, prayer, meditation etc
• that gays and lesbians recruit young people into their lifestyle; homosexuality can be caught like a cold
• that a homosexual agenda exists in which gays and lesbians are seeking special rights for themselves

Some married, heterosexual people feel threatened by the concept of same-sex marriage. They feel that all marriages should be between one man and one woman. The fear is similar to the emotions which drove religious wars and cultural conflicts in the past; e.g. the Protestant/Catholic wars in Europe. They attempted to resolve whether everyone had to be a Roman Catholic, or whether Protestants would be allowed to worship God in their way. Compromise eventually triumphed: Catholics were allowed to continue their beliefs and practices without limitation. But Protestants were also allowed to have their separate beliefs, institutions, churches and practices. Ultimately, this model may become a guide for the next century as increasing numbers of countries follow the Scandinavian lead and continue "marriage" for different-sex couples and recognize gay and lesbian partnerships which are equivalent to marriage (except perhaps that they might be called by another name). The trick will be calm married folk's fears that they might somehow lose something by the deal.

An American public opinion poll was taken in 1996-JUN by ICR Survey Research Group of Media, PA. Results are correct within 3 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

• Same-sex marriage:
  • Overall results: 57% opposed; 30% in favor
  • Females responded: 49% opposed
  • Persons under 35: 47% opposed; 47% in favor
• Equal job opportunities: 10% opposed; 85% in favor (vs. 16 to 76% in 1992)
• Ban gays totally from the military: 15% in favor of a ban
• Allow gays in military (if they are open) 37% opposed; 40% in favor

What does the Bible say about Homosexual Marriages?

Why are Same-Sex Marriages a Hot Topic Now?

• it is built upon a foundation of tens of thousands of other Federal, State/Province, County and City victories for equal rights, engineered by tens of thousands of gay and lesbian activists.
• Christian beliefs and attitudes towards homosexuality are now split, with liberal denominations now giving gays and lesbians full access to membership and ordination
• research into human sexuality has shown that sexual orientation is fixed in adulthood and is caused by genetic and environmental factors outside a person's control. The public has begun to realize that heterosexuality and homosexuality are simply two different, natural, unchangeable orientations.
• our view of marriage has rapidly changed. A century ago, marriage was for life: only a very small percentage of people divorced. Authority over the woman was formally transferred from the father of the bride to the new husband at the marriage ceremony. Gender roles restricted women's freedoms. Now, most committed couples in North America live together before marriage. Divorce terminates about half of all marriages. Women are having children outside of marriage. Large numbers of heterosexual couples are living together without being married. Some couples have decided to pursue two careers and to have no children. Surrogate motherhood is increasing. So are inter-faith and inter-racial marriages. All of these trends are causing people to alter their perception of marriage, and broaden their definition of the term. The idea of same-sex marriages now seems to many people to be simply one more variation.

Internet Resources

• A copy of the Hawaii Supreme Court decision (124k) is seen at: http://www.eff.org/pub/CAF/civil-liberty/baehr-v-lewin
• If you doubt the importance of extending the marriage option to gays and lesbians, please read about the pain that hatred can accomplish in the absence of such legislation: http://www.critpath.org/pflag-talk/support/reason/jimmy.htm
• The Queer Resources Directory maintains a page of same-sex marriage information; it is frequently updated. See: http://qrd.tcp.com/qrd/usa/hawaii/marriage.update/
• The Hawaiian Equal Marriage Rights Project includes the current state-by-state status of anti-same-sex legislation, Hawaiian news, the text of the report of the Commission on Sexual Orientation and the Law, etc. It is at: http://nether.net/~rod/html/sub/marriage/himarr.html
• The Partners Task Force for Gay and Lesbian Couples maintains an extensive WWW site on same sex partnerships/marriages at http://www.eskimo.com/~demian/toc.html They include an extensive list of benefits given to married couples under US federal law and regulations at http://www.eskimo.com/~demian/mar-fed.html

Other Resources

• An English translation of the Danish Act on Registered Partnership can be obtained for $2.00 USF from Paz y Liberacion, Box 66450, Houston, TX 77266.
• Tess Ayers & Paul Brown, "The Essential Guide to Lesbian and Gay Weddings", HarperCollins (1994)
• John Boswell, "Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe, Vintage Books (1995)
• William N. Eskridge, "The Case for Same-Sex Marriage: From Sexual Liberty to Civilized Commitment", Free Press (1996)
• Suzanne Sherman, "Lesbian and Gay Marriage: Private Commitments, Public Ceremonies", Temple University Press, (1992)
• Michael Willhoite, "Daddy's Wedding", Alyson Publ. (1996)