Opinion

Op-Ed: No one loses when same-sex marriage is legalized

By Mario Moretto

Posted on April 09, 2009, at 12:00 a.m.

It’s no secret that I’m a pretty liberal guy – dare I say, “a leftist.” Despite my own political leanings, I am usually able to understand, at least in some way, the position and logic of those I disagree with.

Then there are debates where I can’t for the life of me figure out what the big deal is. Gay marriage is one of them.

A lot of issues in American politics and culture divide people not because these people have different goals, but different beliefs and conceptions about how to best achieve the goal. For example, most Americans want our country to prosper, but this doesn’t stop us from debating, usually in a healthy way, on exactly how to do that.

Same-sex marriage isn’t a matter of having different ideas for how to achieve a goal, this is a case where one side of a debate wants to specifically and legally keep one group of people – same-sex couples – from having the same rights as another group of people – straight couples.

Opponents of marriage equality sometimes argue that same-sex couples are less stable, make for unfit parents, etc. When easily googled statistics prove these accusations wrong, we’re left to see the real argument made by those opposed to same-sex marriage: They don’t like it. It offends them, usually on religious grounds.

Even though I’m an agnostic, I understand that some people’s religious beliefs and convictions lead them to believe that homosexuality is immoral or wrong. I can follow this logically to see that, believing homosexuality to be immoral and wrong, they are offended by the idea of same-sex couples getting married. Where I get lost, and stop understanding, is at the point where opponents of marriage equality get the idea that being offended – even for religious reasons – is a legitimate reason to pass laws that prevent equal access to something as basic as the right to marry whoever you love.

Luckily, the courts aren’t buying it. A precedent is being set on how to overturn discriminatory laws in states whose constitutions have an “equal protection” clause. Last week, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that “the exclusion of gay and lesbian people from the institution of civil marriage does not substantially further any important governmental objective.” It went on to rule further, “If gay and lesbian people must submit to different treatment without an exceedingly persuasive justification, they are deprived of the benefits of the principle of equal protection upon which the rule of law is founded.”

The court also discussed the religious nature of opposition to same-sex marriage, stating that “In pursuing our task in this case, we proceed as civil judges, far removed from the theological debate of religious clerics, and focus only on the concept of civil marriage and the state licensing system that identifies a limited class of persons entitled to secular rights and benefits associated with marriage.”

Yesterday, Vermont’s legislature voted to override a Governor’s veto to establish same-sex marriage in the green mountain state.

While this is certainly cause to celebrate, it is important to realize that same-sex marriage is still illegal in 43 states, and 29 states have constitutional amendments that specifically define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Hopefully, more states can follow the lead of Iowa, Vermont, Massachusetts and Connecticut in realizing that giving gays and lesbians civil, secular marriage rights is more important than protecting personal religious beliefs from ever being confronted or offended.

Mario Moretto is opinion editor for The Maine Campus

Campus Currents: Gay Marriage