Marriage: What's the state got to with it?
by Liz RizzoContributing editor Liz Rizzo also blogs at Everyday Goddess.
I thought I was the only one.
For a few years now I've been thinking about getting married. No, not to anyone in particular, and not in any given time frame - but thinking about marriage and what it means to me. Because I strongly believe in marriage - long-term, come-what-may, monogamous marriage.
Now, for me, marriage has never had anything to do with a church. One of my personal pet peeves is people who never attend church, but then get married there. Or getting married in a church you don't believe in because of family pressures. We all choose our compromises, I guess. And certainly, many people are religious and connecting their marriage to their church is very important to them. For many people, marriage has a whole heck of a lot to do with their church. Lucky them if they live in a country where they have their religious freedom.
I will never be married in a church.
But for most of my life, I did accept the fact that getting married means a trip to your local marriage licensing department. It always kinda gave me pause, that aspect, but marriage does have legal meaning. Legal benefits. Legal disadvantages even.
I've never been one to think "a piece of paper doesn't mean anything." It does mean something. Just like the degrees I hold. Yes, I wanted them. They mean something.
So ultimately, should I get married, I would want to "make it legal."
Except that lately, more and more, month by month, I've realized that I have a serious issue with getting legally married in a country that doesn't allow homosexual people the same rights. Were I to desire to get married today, I know I would look into other options, and I think my future husband would have to be of the same mind.
Because I can get married and have a husband, and in reality, it's a choice to make it any of the state's business. Except...
I also know that there are huge disadvantages to not "making it legal," the biggest of which (I believe) is medical insurance issues. It seems insane not to take advantage of the right that I have as a heterosexual in America - the right to get legally married and be recognized as married.
So I just assumed that I was the only one who was thinking what I've been thinking. But I'm not.
I've recently met others who feel the same way, and suddenly I wonder, how many of us are there? And I wonder, is there a lawyer out there working on a legal connection package? Power of attorney, etc. There are ways to connect without a marriage license. What can you cover, and what vulnerabilities remain? I'm sure this is something the gay community has explored, but I think there may be a developing heterosexual market here. I'm not a lawyer, so I can only scratch the surface of this thinking. I'm talking about something that everyone can access, so as to easily consider the option and be fully informed.
I'd also love to see a financial analysis of the monetary cost of the "marriage tax" vs. the cost of privately insuring a spouse. Hell, if enough heterosexual people stopped registering their marriages, a market might develop for a spousal health insurance policy and make it more financially reasonable. And it could potentially increase pressure to allow legal marriage between any two people who want to get married.
Freedom. Rights. For me, that's what America is supposed to be about.
Ultimately, how much do your principles mean? Ultimately, how reasonable is a sacrifice and what level of sacrifice do you choose? I think of it like paying taxes for education. I don't have children, but I benefit from living in an educated society. I'm not homosexual, but I benefit from living in a country where freedoms and rights aren't based on gender, race, sexuality, geographic location, occupation, etc.
Movements can be effective. Marches. Lobbying. People coming together to effect change.
Another thing that changes the world: Individual Actions.
Americans marched for racial freedoms and equal rights, but at the same time, people of different races fell in love and got married. Sometimes I wonder which of these is the most powerful.
Sometimes I think it's what we each do day to day, the little choices, the personal stands, that ultimately change our world.
So on the day that I am fortunate enough to decide to get married, it's going to matter to me that every American has the same right. If we don't - all have that right - I don't think I have it in me to sign that little piece of paper. Because right now, as an American, it simply doesn't mean what I believe it should mean.
Posted In
XML Feed Recent Comments
Books: The Flu,
Family
Dysfunction and
Free Escape on post Books: The Flu, Family Dysfunction and Free Escape
Family
Dysfunction and
Free Escape on post Books: The Flu, Family Dysfunction and Free Escape
That is the
trick on post Digital Doctoring
trick on post Digital Doctoring
Darn on post Digital Doctoring
BlogHer Conferences
Conference Special Offers
- Home
- About Us
- BlogHer Community
- Conferences
- BlogHer Network
- Special Offers
- Contact Us
Follow us on Twitter:
@blogher @bloghersupport @blogherdeals
Become a Facebook Fan
© Copyright 2009 BlogHer | Terms of Service
Comments
Holy Matrimony
I know I'm going against the grain here, and people will be out to ridicule me, but my question is this:
Holy Matrimony a.k.a. marriage took it's origins as a ceremony in a church. I know, of all places right? So many non-religious person attack religion and churches and priests. So why then, if you don't believe in church would you wish to get married? And why then would the state even care who "makes it legal" or not? Marriage licenses aren't that expensive, and the fee for a Justice of the Peace isn't that costly either (in Wisconsin, anyway). It's not like it's a multi-million dollar "institution."
As a Catholic (insert your groans and gripes here), it was important that I be married in my church, because I do practice my religion and I have faith that God is with me. That said, I don't agree with the Catholics' condemnation of homosexuals. We simply cannot grasp the concept of why individuals, both heterosexual and homosexual, would wish to participate in "holy matrimony" (in a church, no less) if they are against the church or religion?
I have many gay and lesbian friends. They desperately wish to get married. I don't blame them. When you love someone, marriage is the next logical step. But some of these relationships have ended so badly in break-ups and tears. Out of all of the same-sex relationships I've witenssed, none have lasted longer than 2 years. Call me judgmental or ignorant, but I've noticed my gay and lesbian friends are not "that serious" when it comes to monogamy. I know it's not like this with all same-sex relationships, and I'm glad to know many partners have been together for 10 or more years.
In my opinion (take it with a grain of salt), I think they should be granted a civil union. Which is similar to marriage. The "marriage" terminology is so outdated. Most marriages end in divorce these days. Sad but true. Perhaps if people didn't take it so lightly it would still hold it's sacred value.
Dana/a>
Okay, Dana
Oooh oooh Mr. Kotter! Pick ME!
I'll call you judgemental and ignorant. As long as you asked.
Anecdotal evidence or a sample size of 6 (or whatever) doesn't equal statistical validation.
Right. Well. What we've learned from that is... that your friends seem to break up a lot. It has absolutely zero bearing on the gay community as a whole, or whether this segment of the population is entitled to the same rights as everyone else. Last time I checked, no one asked "how seriously do you REALLY take this?" before issuing a marriage license.
I've gotta say, I found that incredibly offensive (and I'm hetero). Even if it was true... your point is...?
Then again, I guess I'll have to own up to having a bias right at the beginning of your comment. You're a devout Catholic who disagrees with your church's view of homosexuality? But you continue to worship within their teachings? Ooooookay.
Personally, I couldn't worship at a church that upheld what I believe to be such a fundamental lack of respect for human rights. But maybe that's just me. And yeah, I'm a Christian, and I believe in the sanctity of marriage. I also think that saying "marriage began in the church" as a justification for it being unavailable to those who wish to join OUTSIDE of a church is rather... narrow. Marriage--like many things in our society--has transformed into something more than a religious ceremony. It's available outside of that setting for just that reason. And it should be available to everyone.
Great post, Liz. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
--
Mir from WCS
(BlogHer Mommy & Family contributing editor)
Personal: Woulda Coulda Shoulda
At Ty's Toy Box: Listen to your Mommy!
Marriage from the church?
Thanks, Mir,
I wonder, do you know if that's true, that the concept of marriage was born in the church? I agree that it's not of ultimate relevance today if it was, but I have to admit I thought that the church probably borrowed it the same way Christmas was created from pagan winter festivals.
Personally, I couldn't
Not that anyone cares, but I don't believe in having Blind Faith when it comes to religion. I study not only my Catholic faith, but the religions of Judaism, Buddhism and even the Lutheran, Methodist and Baptist churches. How can I truly understand my own beliefs if I don't take the time to learn about others?
I'm not just Catholic because my parents told me I had to be. And they did. They forced Catholicism down my throat. And because of this I researched the differences between my faith and those of others. I decided to remain Catholic because I believed in most of what I learned as opposed to becoming Jewish, Buddhist, Baptist, Evangelical, Lutheran or Methodist.
As far as the Catholic church goes, they believe that homosexuality is a sin. Many Catholics will condemn a person for being gay or lesbian. They are uncomfortable. I don't agree with that condemnation. A person is a person and should be treated with respect.
As far as the "sin" goes. I don't know what I believe about that. I haven't grasped that concept yet. But at least I'm honest about it. At least I take the time to think about it, to express my feelings of uncertainty and not just jumping on the bandwagon of either side of the spectrum. But that's just me.
Can you tell me that anyone who practices any religion believes in said religion 100%?
My former college professer is Jewish and he eats pork. Should he stop going to temple because of this?
I'm a dyke and anti marriage but....
just because you only know queers who have been unable to "make it" for more than 2 years doesn't mean they aren't that serious when it comes to monogamy.
What it means is different for every single one of those people, there are more reasons for breaking up than there are for hooking up. One of the reasons might be that the pressure placed on a gay relationship by a condescending, judgemental and unaccepting society, (not to mention their family, friends and coworkers), is more than they can take - as a couple or as individuals.
Would your relationship survive if you were judged and poked and prodded and examined and denied in one way or another, EVERY SINGLE DAY by someone?
Walk a mile in their shoes before you judge people by your standards, please.
By the way, my g/f and I just celebrated our 4th anniversary, after a year of "dating". Do we have to hit the 10 year mark? or the 20 before you consider us serious about monogamy? Just wondering.
~Denise
Daily Dose of Denise
I'm glad to hear that you
I'm glad to hear that you and your girlfriend have celebrated four years together. Happy Anniversary!
This day and age that's a long time for any couple, gay or straight. My husband I will be celebrating 5 years this October.
I can't answer your question on whether you are serious about monogamy. Only you can decide that.
In my original post, I simply stated what I noticed with my friends. Upon reading my entry, Ella stated to me that she and her girlfriend have an open relationship in which they freely date and have sex with others while remaining together as life partners. She also told me if she and her girlfriend could get married they would, but still keep their open relationship.
I suppose I just can't comprehend that. Why get married, just to maintain a lifestyle that you would if you were single? When I asked her, she told me I wouldn't understand. That there are others like her and her g/f who have similar relationships.
I wasn't trying to generalize and I realize it came across that way. For that I apologize.
Again, Happy Anniversary, and many more to come.
Open relationships
You know a lesbian couple with an open relationship, I have known two heterosexual couples with such an arrangement (and a couple of polyamourous couples, too). That's something entirely different and not specifically related to homosexuality.
Why do these people get married? You know why - legal and financial and yes, even, emotional support and security. It's not your way or mine, but it seems to work for them, doesn't it?
~Denise
Daily Dose of Denise
Question
In your earlier post, you stated you were against marriage. I'm curious as to why?
Perhaps I would better understand your viewpoint.
Legal and Financial benefits as a reason to get married, still doesn't make it the right decision. Regardless if a couple has an open relationship or not, doesn't make it okay. I got married because I loved my husband. Not because of health insurance or tax breaks. When I got married, I knew I would be faithful to my husband. Not run out and get a divorce or have an affair when the going got tough. You are right it is not the decision for you or me to make. And there are several couples who abuse this institution. It's frustrating. I've been conflicted with this subject for as long as I can remember. I suppose I should just give in to the popular belief like everyone else, right?
Anti- marriage....
You can read about why I'm not pro-gay-marriage, here - in a nutshull, I'm anti-marriage in general but I'm more so for gay folks because joining this flawed institution seems like one of those "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em things". Joining straight folks in this respect isn't going to make marriage any less flawed than it is today.
Dana - here is where you and I really differ. It's actually the stumbling block I have with people in general.
What or who gives you the right to decide that someone else's reason "isn't the right reason"? Who are you to decide that an open relationship isn't ok? It doesn't effect you in any way, shape or form.
You got married because you love your husband, how do you know that others in an open relationship DON'T love their spouses? They do, and monogamy simply isn't the way they feel it is necessary to show their love. Or maybe openness IS the way they choose to show their love.
As I said, an open relationship does not work for me but I have a lot of respect for a couple who can do this. A couple who can open those doors and still love each other the next day. Amazing and awe-inspiring, that's how I look at those relationships.
~Denise
Daily Dose of Denise
What or who gives you the
I didn't say that these persons didn't make the right decision. I stated that getting married for financial or legal benefits, doesn't make it right. If that's the only reason a couple got married I feel sorry for them. I would hope they got married because they loved that person and wanted to spend the rest of their lives together. Because they wanted to be faithful and true to that person. That they would not want another.
I don't know if those persons love their spouses. I'm not the one who gets to decide that. That's up to them. But I would think that if you truly loved your spouse you wouldn't want to have sex with someone else. Remember, that's just my opinion. Not fact or unwritten law. To me, the ones who participate in open relationships come across as though they can't or won't fight the tempation. (Another opinion!) What happened to the vows they took to be faithful?
I've noticed
I've noticed that my Catholic friends are most likely to get married in a church with absolutely no interest or regard for said church. Oh, the stories about lying to the priest in Catholic marriage counseling. Oh, the complete lack of church attendence after said marriage.
But then, that's a handful of people. And I also have a Catholic friend who takes her religion very seriously, so none of the above was true for her.
That's the problem with anecdotal evidence. It's heavily effected by where you live, your age, who your friends are, etc.
Danafiles, I am not out to ridicule you. Your opinion is welcome here, and I'm glad you came and started off the comments. But I do think that the concept of marriage in today's world has expanded way beyond the confines of the church. If it was only something that concerned the church, the state wouldn't be involved at all, and the rights of secular citizens wouldn't be effected.
Legal resources for unmarried and LGBT
couples
Thanks for your article, Liz. I appreciate the resolve of people like you (and Charlize Theron) in not taking advantage of rights that are denied same-sex couples.
A Legal Guide for Lesbian and Gay Couples, by Nolo Press, is a good resource if you're working on a "legal connection package." It's aimed at LGBT folks, but I think a lot of it is applicable to any unmarried couple. Most attorneys who specialize in LGBT issues do have experience in preparing these types of documents, as you say. The Human Rights Campaign has an attorney referral tool to start people in the right direction.
FYI, there are currently 1138 federal rights granted to married heterosexual couples that are denied to same-sex couples. I imagine unmarried heterosexual couples are also denied many of them.
I don't have a financial analysis of the marriage tax vs. private insurance, but if you're interested, there's an analysis of The Cost of Marriage Inequality to Children and Their Same-Sex Parents.
Regards,
Dana
Mombian: Sustenance for Lesbian Moms
http://www.mombian.com
Great resources!
Thank you!
...in the manner of Friends.
Quakers are a diverse lot, and practices vary from meeting to meeting, but there are among Friends many marriages bound by the couple and shared by the community without a great deal of concern for what the state has to say. "Marriage under the care of the meeting" is a beautiful thing and many, many meetings are simply concerned that the couple share clarity about their love and commitment, and less concerned with gender.
Some people consider taxes a matter of choice and conscience. Why shouldn't the same thinking apply to state licensure of relationships?
This probably doesn't answer the concerns about insurance and whatnot.
I'll put my head on the chopping block
I'm a fundamental Christian and one of the things I worry about legalizing gay marriage is that what protection does the church have if they refuse to marry someone? My church wouldn't marry them, but I would hate to see us sued because we held firm to what we believe.
I agree with the civil union(kind of) because then it wouldn't involve the church. Just because the word marriage has evolved in society doesn't mean God evolved and changed His mind how he felt about it.
Space and Time
Hm
Thanks for commenting manicmom (and everyone!)
I have to say that is an interesting concern. I find it hard to believe that a religious institution would ever be forced to go against it's own doctrines by the state.
My concern with civil unions to date is that they only exist for gay commitments - heterosexual couples still have to be "married," the civil option isn't open for them. (I may be wrong here, but I believe that's the case.) Plus, nowadays, there's issues where gay couples do have health insurance rights in some companies that heterosexual couples can't access unless they get married.
Growing pains, I suppose.
Suing the church
When you're talking about basic civil rights, then I believe a church really has to follow the letter of the law. Your church can't believe it's ok to sacrifice virgins or enslave another human being etc... But, I don't really believe that marriage is a basic civil right, either.
~Denise
Daily Dose of Denise
I don't know what church
I don't know what church believes in virgins sacrifices or slavery, so I don't know what that has to do with following a churches beliefs? I do believe that marriage is a basic right. But it's not the end all be all to living a good life unlike many other civic rights.
Space and Time
Examples
They were examples of what I think would include denial of basic civil rights. There are all sorts of interesting groups calling themselves "religions" and "churches".
~Denise
Daily Dose of Denise
Just to clarify
How is sacrificing a virgin, and that doesn't happen anyway, deny basic civil rights? Slavery yes, but the church never endorsed that anyway, and especiall since the New Testament.
Space and Time
The (Catholic and Christian)
The (Catholic and Christian) Church has supported slavery. Usually under the Paul said slavery was fine, so it is fine by God justification.
In fact the Episcopal church will be considering a resolution at their summer meetings to make reparations for such acts. ~TW
I'm thinking..
I could be wrong.. but I think Denise might have been referring to some of the accepted religious practices as mentioned in the Bible. Though maybe not the sacrificing virgins thing...
Debra
A Stitch In Time
Simple Still Life
Maya, some Celtic,
Maya, some Celtic, Tantrism,...all have a history of human sacrifice and in the case of tantrism may perhaps still have such things, but they will definitely be considered murder rather than religious practice here. Sorta like those religions that go for ritual child abuse and the like .
ack ack ack
I'd really hoped this discussion would stay in the realm of the practical; i.e., what civil unions mean, whether that's equivalent, why heteros don't have a comparable option, etc.
Manicmom, "changed His mind?" You keep kosher, right? Because God "said" it's an abomination to eat pork.
Please let's not get into a scriptural pissing match. While I'm all for holding the scriptures close to your heart (if you choose to follow them), I'm also for remembering that all we have to guide us in organized religion is our best INTERPRETATION of God's will. Comments like that are why I'm afraid to tell people I'm Christian; as a whole, we appear to be a pretty inflexible and judgemental lot. Go figure.
--
Mir from WCS
(BlogHer Mommy & Family contributing editor)
Personal: Woulda Coulda Shoulda
At Ty's Toy Box: Listen to your Mommy!
Well Mir, the New Testament
Well Mir, the New Testament abolished all food laws. I haven't see it advocate homosexuality, but when I do I'll change my mind. I believe we as Christians should remain inflexible. The Bible hasn't changed it's principles, so why should we as a society? I'm not afraid of saying I'm a Christian.
Practicality? Even heterosexuals can have a civil union, so that's not a main issue.
I'm wondering why gay marriage is an issue for Liz when many other issues in Ameica concern more of a population. Let's rally for Univeral Healthcare so that no one goes without insurance, gay or straight. Or longer maternity leaves. And that would also include the gay community, because if they adopt they get a materity leave as well. Why just this one single issue?
Space and Time
Why this is an issue...
Are you suggesting that Liz is only interested in this particular issue and not issues like universal healthcare or maternity leave? Since when does caring about one issue mean you can't care about others? As Americans it is our responsiblity to care about all issues, or as many as we can wrap our heads around without exploding. ;-)
Also, look at Liz's post - the reason she feels strongly about gay marriage is because she sees our country as limiting the rights of a specific group of people. It appears to me she explained why this is important to her,she cares about my rights as a citizen of this country as much as she cares about yours or her own. It seems like a pretty decent reason, to me.
I'm not saying Liz is short
I'm not saying Liz is short sided and only thinking of one issue. But I think if we are going to hold rally's and try to change our laws there are alot more to be concerned about than this one issue. Universal health care would wipe out the concern, for one, that anyone gay or straight can't get insurance.
Space and Time
Our issues are many
Of course, there's a million things this post could be about, but when I blog, I usually try to focus on one thing. I've only got a few paragraphs to flesh out a thought process! Plus, I'm a Sex & Relationships Editor - I happily leave healthcare discussion to other peeps unless we're talking something like birthcontrol or STDs!
That said, universal healthcare is a program. Personally, I deeply wish we had a better education system in the United States, but today, education is also program. I can get passionate about programs and program reform, and certainly these things are super important and worth all the discussion we care to give them.
But here I'm talking about the *right* to get married, to be recognized as a married American citizen and to obtain all the rights and benefits that that status currently confers in America.
And when taxpaying citizens are being denied rights that other taxpaying citizens have access to for reasons that have to do with the freedom of those citizens to be who they are, yeah, this American gets seriously disturbed. What can I say, it's in the blood.
I don't think this is a substantive concern
Right now, churches can refuse to marry someone, and it happens all the time. A Catholic church can refuse to marry someone who has been divorced. There are churches who won't marry people who are not of their faith, or who haven't passed their pre-marital counseling program. Pastors refuse to perform ceremonies for couples whom the pastor deems unready or unsuited for marriage. Allowing civil marriage for same-sex unions does not deprive churches of their right to the free exercise of their religious beliefs.
Now the theological discussion, that's a different conversation.
Professor Kim
BlogHer Contributing Editor, Law and Journalism/Media
Sorry to Serial post
I had to come back to this. I wonder why this issue is something you feel strongly about that is wrong in the states when there are just as many issues that are as important or more important. Why aren't we lobbying the government for Universal Healthcare for everyone? Gay straight or undecided? There are many people, myself included, living a lower quality of health because we can't afford insurance. I like the socialist part of our neighbors to the north for that very reason.
Also, another unfair practice is our ungodly materinity leaves in the states leaves much to be desired? When you have children, will it bother you that many women are forced to go back to work 6 or even less weeks so they can maintain a job, health benefits, and other benefits? I'm not criticizing you in the least, I just wonder if there are other things you wouldn't be able to the US just because someone can't do it? I'm not meaning to be harsh, I just think there's alot more important issues to be rallying for that affect all of us.
Space and Time