The Tide is Turning

Last night, New York became the sixth state in the Union to legalize marriage for all human beings. The world did not end, the earth did not rend, spewing forth molten magma and swallowing the citizens of modern day Sodom. Nor did celestial trumpets blare forth a paean of triumph. It could be just another proof that there is no god directing our destiny. Or more charitably, it may be proof that an omnipotent deity concerned with the creation and ordering of the entire cosmos has far better things to do that wonder about whether men should lie with men and that our lives, our futures and all we aspire to is up to us. Whatever the truth of god's existence, there is no doubt that we are at our best as human beings when we look within ourselves for the answers we seek and find the strength there to do the right thing by our fellowmen.

It took a pair of Republican senators to join the other thirty one in favor of allowing all citizens of New York the same marital rights; the sadness is that twenty nine remain obdurately opposed to what seems a self evident truth to all of us on this side of the line, but one can only hope that they will realize that the world belongs to all of us, even those who may not share our sexual predilections, and they deserve the same rights and freedoms as us. It is not a an act of kindness on our part, it is not our benevolent magnanimity that we finally suffer them to live like us; it is our shame that we have taken so long to recognize the reality and stop withholding what was their birthright as much as ours.

Today, New York pats itself on the back for having done the right thing. There is no point in harking back to their failures in the past, but it is nevertheless pointing out, even if it means being cavalier that they are late to the party, and that the real turning points were reached some time ago. It started in Massachusetts, but for me the biggest win was Iowa. Before Iowa, opponents of universal marriage could argue that this was a movement born in the liberal strongholds of the coastal strip and did not reflect the bedrock values of the heartland, whatever those may be and wherever that mythical place may be. But Iowa changed that. Iowa, in the heart of the Midwest can never be dismissed as a socialist bleeding heart liberal enclave. If a state epitomizes the imaginary "true" America, it may well be Iowa. Known for early primaries and corn, rather than a burning desire to right the wrongs of society, Iowa legalized universal marriage with a typically Midwestern lack of excitement, with none of the hype and noise and beating of breasts that accompanied New York's entry into the enlightened club.

I do not know which state will be next, though it seems likely that the first push will come out of New England before the conservative center begins to feel the pressure. And though marshaling logical arguments in favor of universal freedom is unlikely to win over the opponents, it is nonetheless worth addressing one of the most widely touted fallacies, that allowing same-sex marriage undermines "traditional" marriage. If one were to ask these adherents which precise tradition they yearned for, it is unlikely that they would have a common answer, for the traditions of marriage are as diverse as the cultures that spawned them. Likely though that the conservative defenders of traditional marriage believe that there is something sacred about a marriage between a man and a woman and they cling to the notion that the god they worship has sanctioned this marriage.

In fact, marriage had little to do with religion and everything to do with strictly secular and material concerns like property and money. It is no coincidence that elaborate marriage was required only amongst the upper classes and nobility of medieval Europe, and that such marriages included lengthy settlements dealing with decidedly material issues, with religious authority mostly invoked only to prevent untimely dissolution of unions that guided the destinies of the land. It's worth recalling that Henry VIII split the Catholic church because he was denied an annulment of his marriage. Mormonism, growing rapidly in America, has a traditional marriage based on polygamy; is that the "traditional" marriage opponents of modern marriage yearn towards? Ancient Jewish custom recognized polygamy, and also treated the women as mere child producing chattels, possessions of their fathers and husbands. There was a moment in early Christianity when marriage was wholly dissuaded, in favor of universal celibacy. But perhaps even the most devout traditionalists would shy away from a tradition that is not even marriage at all.

In the end, tradition is just tradition and if we do not eat as our ancestors did, nor travel as they did, nor speak as they did why should we choose one random tradition and raise it above the others and demand that it be maintained. Slavery was also a tradition, as was serfdom, and burning witches as the stake. If traditional marriage is sacred, then surely we need to simply decide which period we aspire to and throw out everything, every aspect of our lives that does not conform to that tradition. Which reminds me that we have a construction project starting soon - we need to find a virgin to sacrifice and bury in the foundation to appease the gods and ensure the safety of construction. It's tradition!