Reader Commentaries
By Rev. Andrew Foster Connors
Tuesday, September 20, 2005 10:18 AM EDT
This summer my wife and I took our two children over to play at the house of some of my parishioners, Gita Deane and Lisa Polyak. Gita and Lisa are plaintiffs in a lawsuit seeking to end the unfairness of Maryland law that bars same-sex couples from the protections and responsibilities of marriage that my wife and I enjoy.
Like us, they have two children. Unlike us they have been together for 26 years (we've been together for 12). Like us they have tried to give their children the best opportunities to learn and grow. Unlike us, they have to worry about explaining their family at every turn, proving to school administrators, or immigration officials, or hospital workers that they are a family. Like us they have figured out together who has the responsibility for paying the bills, whose turn it is to clean up the kitchen, and how to have a good argument and still stay together after it's over.
Lisa and Gita are a family - a fairly ordinary family at that. So it's hard for me to understand why some of our religious and political leaders are claiming that because of families like Lisa and Gita's the institution of marriage is "under attack." In a nation that boasts a 50 percent divorce rate, it is disingenuous to blame committed same-sex couples who are eager to take on the legal responsibilities of caring for each other and their children for undermining traditional marriage.
That most of the opposition to marriage for same-sex couples has come from Christian voices is equally perplexing. I'm not surprised that religious voices have entered the debate. This is to be expected and, in fact, welcomed. Religious communities ought to have some wisdom to offer to a debate about the purpose of two people making a lifelong commitment to one another, or about the legitimate interest of the state in protecting and supporting families in a free society. But most of the rhetoric so far has been, frankly, disappointing. Opponents of marriage for same-sex couples claim that it violates the teaching of the Bible. Yet, the institution of marriage has taken many forms and shapes throughout the pages of the Bible and throughout the history of most religious communities, including the Christian Church. Thankfully, we've come a long way since the days when women were treated like property and men were free to marry as many women as they wanted. A deeper honesty about these changes could enrich the public discourse.
Regardless of what wisdom (or lack thereof) enters our public debates, religious communities have the right and the responsibility to debate whether and why to give their blessing to same-sex relationships. All religious communities have a constitutionally-protected right to decide how, or when, or to whom they give their blessing - to decide what should constitute religious marriage.
But just as the Maryland constitution protects religious freedom, it also guarantees that all Marylanders are treated equally. While churches are free to marry whomever they choose to marry, it's unfair for the state to deny same-sex couples, who make the same kinds of commitments that married couples make, from the many protections that come with marriage.
We look to the state to support all of its citizens in pursuing their dreams, sustaining themselves, and contributing to the well-being of society. We look to the state to support all families and provide for the welfare of all children. For these very reasons the state has no grounds for prohibiting same-sex partners from receiving the hundreds of legal protections provided to married couples. In fact, by denying family protections to couples like Lisa and Gita who contribute to the social fabric of our state through their work, their family life, and through the raising of their children, the state undermines the very institution that it purports to protect. Same-sex couples have all the same kinds of hopes and dreams as heterosexual couples. They have the same struggles. They buy homes together, they face medical decision-making together, many raise children together.
If anything needs defending these days, it is gay and lesbian couples and their families. I am confident that any judge who looks at Maryland's Constitution will come to the same conclusion. One thing is for certain - if couples like Lisa and Gita are allowed to receive the many protections of marriage, the institution of marriage will not be undermined. On the contrary, such a change may signal the beginning of its redemption.
Rev. Andrew Foster Connors
Brown Memorial Park Avenue
Presbyterian Church
Baltimore