Suggestions for Action
What do you think is the most effective way to turn this idea into real policy?
Add your suggestions here for how you think we should run an advocacy campaign to
advance the idea – including the overall strategy, messaging, targets, and tactics.
Approach this from the standpoint that people reading this forum already agree
with you on the importance of the issue, and are asking "What can we do to help
make this a reality?"
You can also comment on and rank the suggestions submitted by others.
Write a Suggestion
If you would like to leave a suggestion please sign in, or create an account
Endorsements for this Idea
Nonprofits and bloggers can formally endorse an idea they support. 13 current endorsements:
- Backstage w/ Supak
- Even The Desert Has Hummingbirds
- Happening Here
- Green Dads
- Worldwidw Sawdust
- DreamActivist
- Sustainable Food
- Queer by Choice
- WebUrbanist - Urban Life, Culture and Art
- 12 hour pills
- Pennsylvania NOW, Inc.
- Feministing.com
- Liminal States
A GRACEFUL SOLUTION: GET GOVERNMENTS OUT OF THE MARRIAGE AND CIVIL UNITON BUSINESS
.
The real issue is to determine what the law should be. A first step is to question the
roles of the Federal, State and Local governments in marriage/civil unions. My contention is that when one strips away the emotional and the irrelevant issues and holds to principles of the separation of church and state and fairness, then there is no benefit to society for government involvement in marriage or civil unions at all. Presently, all unmarried people in general are denied the special government privileges of marriage, not just gays and lesbians.
Once government and its subsidies for marriage are withdrawn or made available to single people, then churches, organizations and individuals can deal with couples coming together, living together, raising families and doing what people have done forever. Couples are free to determine their relationships and characterize it with any words they choose.
In this way, there is no Prop 8, no marriage laws; no “Healthy Marriage Initiative”; no government marriage licenses; no civil unions; no exclusive Federal subsidies or financial incentives to married people.
The conservatives should welcome the reduction of government and getting government out of our intimate personal lives; the Christian Right should welcome that the church now has authority over the marriage of its members and rather than the government; the 100 million single people should applaud at no longer having to pay for benefits exclusively going to married people; gays will have finally have achieved true equality; the liberals and progressives should welcome the justice of the situation; and libertarians will rejoice at a small move in the direction of “live and let live.” Everyone should be satisfied except those who relish the fight itself.
The problem is framing the issue. Proposition 8 was not about gay marriage, it was about government’s definition of marriage. Government’s role in marriage is actually very limited and very different than our idealized concept of marriage. In our idealized concept of marriage we imagine two people in love, committed to each other, living together, having a family, living happily ever after. A government marriage license/certificate has nothing to do with these images. The government has no tests, no requirements for affirmation of love. The couple need only be of age and different sex (in most states). Nothing else. Its complete universality makes it a hollow document. Its only value is as a voucher to get exclusive government benefits. Benefits subsidized by single people.
Current Government Roles
Local Government: Issues marriage licenses; conducts civil ceremonies; registers the marriage; authorizes people to conduct marriage ceremonies.
State Government: Determines the regulations surrounding marriage
Federal Government: Pays benefits and subsidies to married people; establishes social programs such as the “Healthy Marriage Initiative” granting visas to spouses of citizens. etc. The main benefits are military housing allowances; joint tax filing; Social Security payments to spouses; and spousal exemption from inheritance tax. These financial benefits can amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars over a couple’s lifetime.
Proposed Reasons for Government Involvement and Counter Arguments
1. Prevent incest
• Government denial of marriage licenses is not going to stop incest.
2. Prevent spread of disease
• People are going to have sex, with or without government’s approval
3. Promote loving committed relationships
• It is unimaginable that any government is going to influence people to be loving.
• There is no way the government can have a “love and commitment” test as a condition of issuing a marriage license. In fact there is no marriage license requirement for a couple to say they intend to like each other. A marriage license is only a voucher to get more benefits than single people.
4. Promote a healthy family environment for children
• I submit that it is wishful thinking to believe that any government is going influence the family environment or reform deadbeat fathers.
5. Encourage people to have children
• Women are going to get pregnant without help from the government
6. Prevent gayness from spreading
• The government is not going to influence sexual preference
7. Protect women
• Mothers and expecting mothers may need special help, but not married women in general.
8. Prevent Polygamy
• The government is not going to prevent folks from having multiple partners.
9. Prevent underage people from having sex
• A adult having sex with an underage person is illegal.
10. Provide a way for couples to feel married who do not want to get married in a church.
• There can be organizations dedicated to serving this desire, but it should not be the concern of government.
11. Right not to testify against a spouse
• Each citizen, married or not, should have the right to designate one person that is exempt from having to testify about that citizen.
12. Spousal hospital visitation rights
• Each citizen, married or not, should have the right to designate one person who has visitation rights in the event the citizen is not able to communicate.
13. Regulating the combining of a couple’s finances
• Can be accomplished by contract under existing civil law. The document can be called anything: A “Nuptial Agreement” if the couple desires.
14. Establishing state laws regarding community property
• The community property issue would be determined by contract.
15. Prevent sin
• Separation of church and state. Sin definition and prevention is not an appropriate function of government.
16. Married people need more financial help than single people.
• There are plenty of rich married people and poor single people.
17. It is unfair for the government not to allow gays to marry.
• This would not be an issue if the government withdrew from the marriage business.
• The argument about fairness is weak. It makes it appear that gays want on the government gravy train now, but do not want single people on that same gravy train. Single people are paying for these financial benefits through higher taxes. Hardly fair.
Suggested by Christian Miller on 01/23/2009 @ 05:41PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
1) Consult with Marriage Equality USA and all the state Equalities for their priorities. Pursuing the creation of a 2nd-class system would be a bad idea when the Equalities are consistently calling for true equality. Try to get on the same page with them.
2) Consult with successful equality organizations such as MassEquality on the tools and strategies they found effective in their achievements. Also consult with ones who have had failures to determine what to avoid and what to do more of.
3) Consult with Governor Deval Patrick of Massachusetts on his truly amazing work that ultimately saved marriage equality in this state. He is a straight man in his first term as Governor who not only took a big risk for the sake of others' civil rights, but who worked extremely hard and tirelessly to gain the support of the legislature and succeeded. Predicated on the mountain of achievement by MassEquality, he is the reason that our founding documents are alive in Massachusetts today. He is a model for you, President Obama. Don't let his experience and priceless point of view go by while you consider this great effort.
Suggested by Kathryn Martini on 01/22/2009 @ 07:13PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Show real people and real couples- this has been proven time and again to be the best, most effective tool for combating homophobia and promoting equality for gays and lesbians.
Suggested by Kathryn Martini on 01/22/2009 @ 06:45PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Definition of Marriage as found on Wikipedia:
Marriage is a social, religious, spiritual, or legal union of individuals. This union may also be called matrimony, while the ceremony that marks its beginning is usually called a wedding and the married status created is sometimes called wedlock.Marriage is an institution in which interpersonal relationships (usually intimate and sexual) are acknowledged by the state, by religious authority, or both. It is often viewed as a contract. Civil marriage is the legal concept of marriage as a governmental institution, in accordance with marriage laws of the jurisdiction. If recognized by the state, by the religion(s) to which the parties belong or by society in general, the act of marriage changes the personal and social status of the individuals who enter into it.People marry for many reasons, but usually one or more of the following: legal, social, and economic stability; the formation of a family unit; procreation and the education and nurturing of children; legitimizing sexual relations; public declaration of love; or to obtain citizenship.[1][2]Marriage may take many forms: for example, a union between one man and one woman as husband and wife is a monogamous heterosexual marriage; polygamy – in which a person takes more than one spouse – is common in some societies.[3] Recently, some jurisdictions[4] and denominations[5][6][7] have begun to recognize same-sex marriage, uniting people of the same sex.A marriage is often formalized during a marriage ceremony,[8] which may be performed either by a religious officiant, by a secular State authorised officiator, or (in weddings that have no church or state affiliation) by a trusted friend of the wedding participants. The act of marriage usually creates normative or legal obligations between the individuals involved and, in many societies, their extended families.Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares that "Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses." The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam gives men and women the "right to marriage" regardless of their race, colour or nationality, but not religion.
Now, that being noted.... As a Catholic, I want to say: Equal friggin' Rights for ALL! I should not have more rights as a married heterosexual Catholic woman than my LGBT friends, of whom I have MANY.
Please, people, it's time to get our heads out of our rears. Separate Church and State. Quit being judgemental of one another. Stop trying to breed hate, dissention, and discrimination. Agree to disagree. And support this issue.
Suggested by Kristen Kramer on 01/22/2009 @ 07:20AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Please allow marriage rights for LGBT couples nationwide in the US!
Suggested by Justin Brink on 01/21/2009 @ 09:11PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
There are other legal instruments that can be put in place for a domestic partner to attend to his/her partner in a medical setting as well as a legal setting.
Also looks like there needs to be a prenuptial agreement as well because unfortunate things seem to happen to same sex partners.
For best results I would recommend any same sex partner to put these legal instruments in the hands of his/her partner to enable them to help and take care during emergencies.
However I do have to agree that a same sex union is imperfect by nature's standards for us, however mankind had defied nature from the start, and built this civilization we have.
Suggested by Joe Blow on 01/20/2009 @ 11:28AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Jane - your issue is always a problem when the solution for a discordant heterosexual couple is marriage. Yes, marriage with all its rights and responsibilities and privileges.
How do you solve your problem? It is simple. Get a marriage license and get a justice of the peace to marry you. No one will say no. All federal and state jurisdictions will welcome you into the entirety of the cultural reality that is "married".
OH, THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT IN ALL FIFTY STATES, OUR RIGHT TO MARRIAGE FEDERALLY SPEAKING IS NULL AND VOID...EVEN IN MA AND CT WHERE THE STATE RECOGNIZES US.
Let me , with all due respect, have some difficulty with heterosexual couples who want second class rights when they can obtain full rights in a nanosecond.
Suggested by A B on 01/19/2009 @ 09:26AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I would also like to remind President-Elect Obama that he did at one point favor same-sex marriage as can be seen in his response to the Windy City Times back in 1996.
http://www.wctimes.com/images/publications/wct/2009-01-14/thedocument.jpg
Suggested by Dave Hershey on 01/18/2009 @ 07:48PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
"Yes We Can"..from North,South,East,West, African-American, Caucasian, American Indian, Asian, Gay/straight, disabled to not disabled..we are the United States of America. President-Elect Obama, I hope you mean it. An amendment needs added to allow any one person to marry another person gay/or straight. Gay people are discriminated in so many federal, state and corporate policies because Gay Americans cannot use the word 'spouse'. I am tired of lying on forms..that I am single..In my mind, heart and soul..I am married. We Deserve Equality as every American!!
I know it is a troubling issue for many narrow viewed so called Christians..and they can think what they want.
But Our Country, the same Country that Mr.Obama speaks of so often was formed on the basis of separation of church and state.
I am not into offending any church or denomination..I just want the ability to go to a courthouse with my loved one and get a marriage license and enjoy all the rights and responsibilities that come with legal marriage. No civil union to appease those who cannot and will not acknowledge what equal rights truly mean.
Mr. Obama I challenge you to look within yourself..and acknowledge and separate your possible religious beliefs from what is right. Legal rights to married spouses is what courts honor without doubt..civil unions are contestable and separate and not equal. It is not about being able to visit in hospitals, etc. It is about everything..car insurance, buying a house, wills, living wills, children..it is only an issue because it is made a big issue. I live my life and love my partner no matter what others believe. Many people accept. If for some reason gay marriage was added to the Constitution in the midst of the night like a bailout bill..and we just simply had the right to get married..our neighbors and co-workers would not be effected at all..it would harm no one. If anything it promotes committment and happier lives. Who does that hurt?
Mr. Obama, please just take a brave stance and make it be so..just blanket statement equality for all..otherwise quit stating it so openly in all your speeches.
We have so many real problems in this real world to work on and this is the last group truly and legally discriminated against in laws and policies across this nation and WE ALL NEED TO MOVE FORWARD AS AMERICANS!
Suggested by tina cunningham on 01/18/2009 @ 07:27PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Here is a possible way to start moving this thing forward: Since there are thousands of legally married gay couples in a few states already, I propose they file their 2008 federal tax returns as "married" and when the IRS rejects these returns, with the help of ACLU or other legal organizations, bring a class action lawsuit against the IRS and the federal government. This might force the federal government to grant equal rights in tax treatment, immigration, etc. to already legally married couples. Of course, beyond this, there must be a way of proving that the equal protection clause of the US Constitution can be enforced to require all states to perform and recognize marriages between any two consenting adults.
Suggested by Mikhail Shneyder on 01/18/2009 @ 04:24PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.