Right before I left for vacation, New York state legalized same-sex marriage after a fairly dramatic series of events (by state law standards, anyway). The law went into effect on July 24, 2011. I’ve been remiss getting this post up because of the debt ceiling and downgrade wrangling, but now I’m getting this one up because I need a quick break from those things. New York is a particularly big deal for several reasons.
First, and most importantly, I think the events in New York are enormously instructive for both advocates and opponents of gay marriage. The big hang-up in New York was exactly what I’ve previously described, namely the different connotations of the word ‘marriage’. Remember, I’ve long contended that supporters are discussing marriage in strictly a legal sense while opponents are thinking mainly in a religious one. This miscommunication came into play in New York because the major legislative sticking point was ensuring sufficient legal protections from discrimination lawsuits for religious organizations that do not wish to marry gay people. Once the supporters were able to assure the religious organizations that their rights were in no way under attack and ensure the necessary legal protections were in place, the bill was able to pass.
Memo to gay marriage supporters: make sure you’re very clear that you’re only talking about the marriage in a legal sense and make your case based on the legal differences between marriages versus civil unions, domestic partnerships, or whatever else your state has.
Memo to gay marriage opponents: this isn’t about forcing a religious organization against its will to marry gay people. It’s about ensuring access to legal rights for gay couples.
Second, New York state, specifically Greenwich Village, was the location of the Stonewall Riots of 1969. Without going into too much detail here, the Stonewall Riots were a major event in the galvanization of the modern gay rights movement. Some view this event as the birth of the movement while some cite other events. I’m not going into that debate here. All I’m going to say is the legalization of gay marriage in the state where such a crucial event occurred is a tremendous victory for the movement.
Third, New York is by far the most populous state to finally legalize gay marriage. New York joins Washington DC (not technically a state, I know), Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Vermont as places in the US that allow same-sex marriage, with Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Massachusetts each lacking laws that explicitly ban same-sex marriage.
As far as I know, every other state has a law and/or constitutional amendment of its own and/or the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) banning same-sex marriage, with Alabama being of particular note because, unlike every other state, it refuses to ever recognize a same-sex marriage even when it was legally done in another state (I think Alabama is acting illegally in doing so).
21 of these states have DOMA alone on the matter. If DOMA disappears, these states will become battlegrounds, as they’ll join the three states mentioned above as lacking explicit bans on same-sex marriage. As I posted previously, the Obama administration is no longer defending the pertinent section of DOMA in court after it was ruled unconstitutional by a Federal district court. With this, DOMA is unofficially sidelined. Until DOMA is either repealed by Congress (and signed by the president) or declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, DOMA is still an issue. Why? Some future president may come in and disagree with Obama’s view of DOMA and resume defending it. Outside of the DOMA situation, California is currently the biggest and probably most interesting battleground, with the current questions of legality regarding their Proposition 8.
This is a major victory for the gay rights movement, but there’s still a lot of work to be done and it needs to be pushed quickly while there’s a somewhat amicable government in Washington DC for the gay rights movement. For all of the shameful faults and epic failures, Barack Obama and the 2008-2010 Congress did more for the gay rights movement than any government I can think of (the 2010-2012 Congress will likely not be so accommodating due to the GOP control of the House of Representatives). The courts have also been consistently ruling in favor of the gay rights movement on several issues.
It’s possible the GOP will maintain its majority in the House of Representatives and it may even pick up a majority in the Senate in the 2012 election. This would make it very difficult to get a repeal of DOMA through Congress. More importantly, if the GOP manages to take the White House in 2012, it’s possible the new president will not only veto a hypothetical repeal of DOMA, but actually resume defending the law in court. Of course, this depends on who the GOP puts up as their ticket. Several candidates in the field, such as Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry, are very conservative on social issues, whereas others, like Jon Huntsman and Mitt Romney, are more moderate on social issues. Furthermore, a GOP president may be more likely to appoint judges that are less friendly to the gay rights movement. Lastly, if the state and national governments goes far enough to the right, the movement to add a marriage amendment to the Constitution may gain traction, but I don’t view this as likely because it would take a drastic shift to the right.
Follow the GOP primaries very closely because they will be key to the future of the gay rights movement. The victory in New York may be short-lived if the sands shift in the coming elections.
No comments:
Post a Comment