Equality

I realize this won’t be popular and some people, including some of my friends, may be offended. If this post offends you I apologize, that is not my intent. Given some of the recent posts and responses I have seen in various social media I wanted to offer my point of view to potentially give a different perspective.

As I read posts on Facebook, Twitter and other social media outlets about the Supreme Court case against the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)and California’s proposition eight I was struck by what seemed to be an double standards, or discrimination, that many people seem to find acceptable. The irony of this is inescapable. A case that is largely based on eliminating what many people feel is unfair discrimination and a denial of rights for a specific group of people is leading to discrimination, and attacks, against another group of people. Only in America….

I like to think I’m a reasonably open minded person. I am a Christian, I served in the US military for nine years and I have been a contributing member of my community all of my adult life. The US constitution, which I swore to defend during my time in the military, entitles me to freedom of religion and freedom of speech. I believe my freedom of religion allows me to believe that marriage is a sacred relationship between a man and a woman as defined in most religions including Islam, Judaism and Christianity.

I believe my freedom of speech allows me to express my religious beliefs as long as I am respectful and do not incite harm to others by my speech. What I find ironic is that by expressing my religious beliefs I am opening myself to being labeled as extreme, right wing, bigoted, hateful, homophobic, etc. So I must either give up my religious freedom or my freedom of speech or risk being labeled, called names, ridiculed, marginalized and harassed. If I were to label, ridicule, harass or denigrate anyone who does not share my religious beliefs I would be open to being charged with harassment, accused of committing a hate crime, losing my job, etc. but people can, and will, continue to harass me and others for our beliefs and no one seems to think anything of it.

A bigot is someone who treats members of another group of people with hatred or intolerance. I don’t think my beliefs or any statement I have made here is intolerant or hateful. I have not stated that anyone is inferior. I have not stated that anyone does not have the right to choose who they will be in a relationship with. I have not stated that people should be treated differently because of their race, religion, gender or gender preference. I have simply stated my religious beliefs. A homophobe is someone who fears or hates a homosexual. I have not expressed any fear or hatred regarding anyone’s choice or gender preference. So, why is it okay for people to label and marginalize my beliefs and my freedom to have them while insisting I honor and respect theirs? Is America turning into a country where all beliefs, except those based on religion, are valid? Is America turning into a country where all ideas and choices are acceptable except the ideas of Christianity and the choice to believe in God?  Equality for some is not equality. Protection for some is not safety.

Marriage predates the United States and the US Constitution. Marriage predates the European Union and the current countries in Europe. Marriage predates Western civilization. The word marriage does not appear anywhere in the US Constitution. Some people say the 14^th amendment guarantees people the right to marry but I don’t agree. The 14^th amendment guarantees people the right to due process and equal treatment under the law. The constitution does not guarantee anyone the “right” to marry nor does the constitution compel anyone to get married. The civil rights that have been granted to married couples were never imbedded in the US constitution and, in my opinion, should not be. I believe the types of civil liberties that have been granted to married couples fall within the responsibilities of the states and if a majority of voters in any given state want to change how those liberties are applied there is a process for passing new legislation that should be used to implement the change. Since most states have passed some form of Defense of Marriage I believe the majority of people share my belief that marriage is a religious institution that defines a relationship between a man and woman. I also believe this debate is about far more than a difference in civil liberties.

Twelve states, including California, have passed legislation allowing civil unions and domestic partner benefits. The current case before the Supreme Court is in part challenging the California law defining marriage as a relationship between men and women. Domestic partners and partners in a civil union are guaranteed the same benefits as married couples under California law so why challenge the California’s proposition eight? If the Supreme Court rules against proposition eight in California the only change that will occur is a label. A change in label but no change in rights, legal protection or liberty. One of the attorneys representing the plaintiff in the case publicly stated that the case was, in part, driven by a desire for people to be able to use the label “married”.  In other words, this case is in part about further eroding the religious beliefs and institutions in American society. America is not a theocracy governed by any church. America is not an oligarchy governed by a small group of people like the Supreme Court. America is a democracy where the majority should rule. People should be given equal protection under the law without regard to religious affiliation or belief but this standard should apply both ways.

I believe everyone is entitled to choose who they will love and have as a partner in life. I believe people should be treated equally by the government without regard to race, religion, sex or creed – as required by the US Constitution. I do not believe equal treatment under the law covers matters that are based on religion or belief such as marriage. If two people, any two people, want to join in a civil union they should be free to do so. If two people, any two people, are legally joined in a partnership they should enjoy all the rights and responsibilities that go along with it. I don’t believe the right to join with any person of your choosing gives you the right to make a mockery of my beliefs or harass and attack me for having the conviction to publicly share my beliefs.