Taking Marriage For Granted
One idea I firmly support is that of Civil Unions for everyone. Rather than legalizing gay marriage, the laws should be changed to recognize civil unions as the only binding legal contract between life partners. Marriages – those contracts recognized by religious institutions – could then either be a subset of civil unions, or a separate thing entirely. In this situation, it would be up to each individual church/synagogue/mosque whatever to decide who they “marry”, but they would have absolutely zero authority to deny anyone the right to be in a social contract with any other person, and or any of the privileges that come with that contract. And if one church refuses to do it, then a same-sex couple, and hopefully any right-thinking straight couple, would choose to have their ceremony conducted elsewhere.
Civil Unions For Everyone
http://godheval.net/civil-unions-for-everyone/
However, I think there is something important to consider here. Many of us “straights” take marriage for granted. Some – if not most – social liberals do not put much importance into “traditional values” such as marriage, meaning that we suppose, by virtue of our own wills, we can enter into a commitment without the church or the law dictating the rules of that agreement. We would cite the ridiculously high divorce rate as proof that marriage is a no more reliable form of commitment than a stated vow.
In fact, not too long ago, I trivialized the issue of gays’ right to marry, not because I would deny them anything, but because I also trivialized marriage. I also dismissed the issue under the pretext that there were “more important” things to talk about. But in truth, it is not my place to say what should and shouldn’t be important to other people, especially when I do not even have the ability to relate to their experiences. It was not until very recently that I recognized my privilege as a straight person to even be able to take marriage for granted.
What we must remember in dismissing or downplaying the significance of marriage is that we – as straight people – will presumably always have the option of marrying or not. We can turn our noses up at the institution now, only to change our minds as we get older and – perhaps inevitably – become more conservative in our thinking.
Same-sex couples do not have this luxury. So I think, while we should continue making arguments for universal civil unions as the truly legally-recognizable social contract between partners, we should maintain some sensitivity to the privileges we have as straight people, and not begrudge anyone the desire to form that contract in the way of their choosing – be it “marriage” in some official ceremony, or civil union before a judge.