Editor's note: To view the opposing viewpoint, click here.
On Friday, March 21st, the battlefield that Michigan’s gay and lesbian couples see in front of them changed. The decision of U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman to end the ban on same-sex marriage in the state has inspired hope in couples throughout Michigan. As a gay man in a long-term relationship of two years with a beautiful man, of course I’m overjoyed.
Those who know me – and maybe those who don’t – know that my relationship and my identity as a gay man is something I have been open about throughout my time in East Lansing. Not only has my boyfriend, kinesiology senior Ricky Price, been invited to all of the functions that I have attended as an active member of James Madison College’s student political structure, but we have even been featured on the front page of The State News in an article on being a same-sex couple on campus.
For the average American, the idea that a proud gay couple can have a great night in one of the many MSU fraternity houses and, if anything, be protected by the many brothers that call that house their home, is an idea that might even be difficult to believe. These and other experiences have led me to believe that the Spartan community might just be a little more progressive than American society in general, in that this community has accepted every student, regardless of sexual orientation, into its community.
However, this feeling was eclipsed by anxiety and frustration because I know the fight is not over for members of the LGBT community. Over the weekend, Attorney General Bill Schuette filed a temporary stay delaying the court’s decision from taking effect.
CNN reported 57 same-sex couples in Ingham County were able to receive marriage certificates on Saturday prior to the stay. I fully expect the state, under a Republican governor and administration, to use a menu of legal avenues to put a permanent stay in place and delay the decision from taking effect, as we have seen in a number of states.
This conflict represents a conflict within the American public that many heterosexual individuals are privileged enough to marginalize or even ignore. I cannot help but look at this issue and see a number of theoretical, logical and political arguments that I hope everyone takes a second and really look at in order to understand why many individuals, including and beyond the gay and lesbian community, support same-sex marriage.
As a proud American and student of public affairs and cultural studies, I believe that the greatest narrative that exists within the U.S. is that every citizen should be equal to their neighbor, despite racial, ethnic, political or gender differences.
With this in mind, I am frustrated others cannot see that the fight for same-sex marriage is not treated like a fight for civil rights. As long as gay and lesbian couples are refused the right to marry, they will continue to be seen as second-class citizens.
As a proud American, I understand and support the argument for a separation of church and state. In this argument, some believe places of worship have the right to refuse same-sex marriage conduction, and even understand that. However, when these ceremonies and rituals provide legal privileges, I refuse to believe that any state should have the power to say that marital status cannot be bestowed over a loving couple.
Although some argue that this is why civil unions for same-sex couples should be instated to allow same-sex couples the same rights as married heterosexual couples, I cannot help but feel annoyed.
These different statuses resemble a form of institutionalized separate-but-equal reality, where individuals are allowed separate legal statuses that are perpetuated to be equal in the eyes of the government.
History has shown that separate-but-equal does not function successfully in any society, whether in South Africa, the U.S. or other nations around the world. Furthermore, as long as being married has a social power that enables individuals to receive benefits from society, this separation can never be equal.
As a proud American, cultural changes in our history are apparent. Just as these changes have allowed women to wear pants and go to war, I believe cultural changes will allow same-sex couples to marry. One cannot refuse to recognize statistics that show Americans are increasingly favoring same-sex marriage.
I believe this shift in culture is the reason this discussion is upon us today. The case DeBoer v Snyder represents a specific component of the fight for same-sex marriage, which is the right to have a family free of institutional inequality. Jayne Rowse and April DeBoer seek to adopt children together. They want to be recognized as a family by the state in the same way a heterosexual family would be recognized. This changing American family underlies a growing fact: American society is evolving, and we need to create a political environment that allows these changes to occur in a way that does not automatically marginalize anyone who deviates from a social norm.
America cannot pride itself on diversity while punishing those that exemplify the difference that accompanies diversity. America cannot pride itself as a nation of equality for all if that simply does not exist, and the legal system is preventing us from reaching that reality.
Daniel Becker is a comparative cultures and politics and international relations junior. Reach him at becker76@msu.edu.
