Meet the gay people against gay marriage
After France's first same-sex marriage, and a vote in the UK Parliament which puts England and Wales on course for gay weddings next summer, two US Supreme Court rulings expected soon could hasten the advance of same-sex marriage across the Atlantic. But some gay people remain opposed. Why?
"It's demonstrably not the same as heterosexual marriage - the religious and social significance of a gay wedding ceremony simply isn't the same."
Jonathan Soroff lives in liberal Massachusetts with his male partner, Sam. He doesn't fit the common stereotype of an opponent of gay marriage.
But like half of his friends, he does not believe that couples of the same gender should marry.
"We're not going to procreate as a couple and while the desire to demonstrate commitment might be laudable, the religious traditions that have accommodated same-sex couples have had to do some fairly major contortions," says Soroff.
The two rulings...
Whether the Defense of Marriage Act (1996) which bans recognition of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional
Whether voters in California were entitled to enact Proposition 8, which overturned a State Supreme Court decision allowing same-sex marriage
Q&A: Same-sex marriage in the US
Until the federal government recognises and codifies the same rights for same-sex couples as straight ones, equality is the goal so why get hung up on a word, he asks.
"I'm not going to walk down the aisle to Mendelssohn wearing white in a church and throw a bouquet and do the first dance," adds Soroff, columnist for the Improper Boston.
"I've been to some lovely gay weddings but aping the traditional heterosexual wedding is weird and I don't understand why anyone wants to do that.
"I'm not saying that people who want that shouldn't have it but for me, all that matters is the legal stuff."
The legal situation could be about to change within days, as the nine Supreme Court judges are considering whether a federal law that does not recognise same-sex marriage - and therefore denies them benefits - is unconstitutional. A second ruling will be made on the legality of California's gay marriage ban.
Continue reading the main story
...and how they affect benefits
Twelve states plus the District of Columbia recognise same-sex marriage, but the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996 banned federal recognition of same-sex marriage
So same-sex married couples only get state benefits such as family medical leave and becoming executor in the absence of a will - but heterosexual married couples also get federal benefits covered by more than 1,000 statutes on tax, immigration and social security
Source: Emily Daskow, lawyer
But while favourable rulings will spark celebrations among pro-marriage supporters across the US, some gay men and women will instead see it as a victory for a patriarchal institution that bears no historical relevance to them.
Some lesbians are opposed to marriage on feminist grounds, says Claudia Card, a professor of philosophy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, because they see it as an institution that serves the interests of men more than women. It is also, in her view "heteronormative", embodying the view that heterosexuality is the preferred and normal sexuality.
"It's undeniable that marriage has historically also discriminated against same-sex couples," Card says.
As a result, she thinks the issue of marriage is a distraction.
Continue reading the main story
Arguments against gay marriage, used by some gay people
Rights are more important than a name
It's a heteronormative institution that has historically marginalised homosexuality
Marriage is "between man and woman" and that's the best environment for children
It's a patriarchal, flawed institution
In countries that have civil partnerships, some gay people say that's enough
"Gay activists should instead put their energies into environmental issues like climate change, because there's a chance to make a morally more defensible and more urgent difference."
Others in the "No" camp oppose marriage more broadly because, they say, it denies benefits to people who are unmarried, or because they say it simply doesn't work.
Legba Carrefour, a self-styled "radical queer", calls it a "destructive way of life" that produces broken families.
"We are only one or two generations away from children coming from gay marriage that are also from broken homes," he says.
He believes a more important priority for the gay community is the rise in violence against transgendered people.
"I'm not concerned about whether I can get married but whether I will die in the street at the hands of homophobes."
Support for gay marriage among Americans in general has risen above 50% according to Gallup, but what the figure is among gay people is harder to quantify. Neither Pew Research Center nor Gallup has conducted any such polling.
Continue reading the main story
More pro-marriage voices
"A civil partnership lacks the cultural and social capital of marriage," writes Patrick Flanery in the Guardian
Three reasons why I'm voting for gay marriage, by Lord Browne in the Financial Times
David Blankenhorn writes in the New York Times how his position on gay marriage changed
Same-sex couples in New York tell of their wedding joy to Laura Trevelyan for BBC News
A community made up of millions of people is bound to hold a range of views on any subject, but it will surprise many that some of the people who on the face of it stand to gain the most from gay marriage should oppose it. And these contrary views are not often heard.
In the UK, Daily Mail columnist Andrew Pierce says that for speaking out against gay marriage in the past, he has been attacked as a homophobe and Uncle Tom, despite a long history of championing gay rights.
He strongly believes that civil partnerships - introduced in 2005 to give same-sex couples equal legal rights - are enough.
"We've got marriage, it's called a civil partnership and I rejoice in the fact that people like me who are different from straight people can do something they can't. I relish that."
He thinks there are more gay people in agreement with him than people may think - at a dinner party he hosted for 11 gay friends, only one was in favour of marriage, one was undecided and the rest were against, he says.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22758434
"It's demonstrably not the same as heterosexual marriage - the religious and social significance of a gay wedding ceremony simply isn't the same."
Jonathan Soroff lives in liberal Massachusetts with his male partner, Sam. He doesn't fit the common stereotype of an opponent of gay marriage.
But like half of his friends, he does not believe that couples of the same gender should marry.
"We're not going to procreate as a couple and while the desire to demonstrate commitment might be laudable, the religious traditions that have accommodated same-sex couples have had to do some fairly major contortions," says Soroff.
The two rulings...
Whether the Defense of Marriage Act (1996) which bans recognition of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional
Whether voters in California were entitled to enact Proposition 8, which overturned a State Supreme Court decision allowing same-sex marriage
Q&A: Same-sex marriage in the US
Until the federal government recognises and codifies the same rights for same-sex couples as straight ones, equality is the goal so why get hung up on a word, he asks.
"I'm not going to walk down the aisle to Mendelssohn wearing white in a church and throw a bouquet and do the first dance," adds Soroff, columnist for the Improper Boston.
"I've been to some lovely gay weddings but aping the traditional heterosexual wedding is weird and I don't understand why anyone wants to do that.
"I'm not saying that people who want that shouldn't have it but for me, all that matters is the legal stuff."
The legal situation could be about to change within days, as the nine Supreme Court judges are considering whether a federal law that does not recognise same-sex marriage - and therefore denies them benefits - is unconstitutional. A second ruling will be made on the legality of California's gay marriage ban.
Continue reading the main story
...and how they affect benefits
Twelve states plus the District of Columbia recognise same-sex marriage, but the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996 banned federal recognition of same-sex marriage
So same-sex married couples only get state benefits such as family medical leave and becoming executor in the absence of a will - but heterosexual married couples also get federal benefits covered by more than 1,000 statutes on tax, immigration and social security
Source: Emily Daskow, lawyer
But while favourable rulings will spark celebrations among pro-marriage supporters across the US, some gay men and women will instead see it as a victory for a patriarchal institution that bears no historical relevance to them.
Some lesbians are opposed to marriage on feminist grounds, says Claudia Card, a professor of philosophy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, because they see it as an institution that serves the interests of men more than women. It is also, in her view "heteronormative", embodying the view that heterosexuality is the preferred and normal sexuality.
"It's undeniable that marriage has historically also discriminated against same-sex couples," Card says.
As a result, she thinks the issue of marriage is a distraction.
Continue reading the main story
Arguments against gay marriage, used by some gay people
Rights are more important than a name
It's a heteronormative institution that has historically marginalised homosexuality
Marriage is "between man and woman" and that's the best environment for children
It's a patriarchal, flawed institution
In countries that have civil partnerships, some gay people say that's enough
"Gay activists should instead put their energies into environmental issues like climate change, because there's a chance to make a morally more defensible and more urgent difference."
Others in the "No" camp oppose marriage more broadly because, they say, it denies benefits to people who are unmarried, or because they say it simply doesn't work.
Legba Carrefour, a self-styled "radical queer", calls it a "destructive way of life" that produces broken families.
"We are only one or two generations away from children coming from gay marriage that are also from broken homes," he says.
He believes a more important priority for the gay community is the rise in violence against transgendered people.
"I'm not concerned about whether I can get married but whether I will die in the street at the hands of homophobes."
Support for gay marriage among Americans in general has risen above 50% according to Gallup, but what the figure is among gay people is harder to quantify. Neither Pew Research Center nor Gallup has conducted any such polling.
Continue reading the main story
More pro-marriage voices
"A civil partnership lacks the cultural and social capital of marriage," writes Patrick Flanery in the Guardian
Three reasons why I'm voting for gay marriage, by Lord Browne in the Financial Times
David Blankenhorn writes in the New York Times how his position on gay marriage changed
Same-sex couples in New York tell of their wedding joy to Laura Trevelyan for BBC News
A community made up of millions of people is bound to hold a range of views on any subject, but it will surprise many that some of the people who on the face of it stand to gain the most from gay marriage should oppose it. And these contrary views are not often heard.
In the UK, Daily Mail columnist Andrew Pierce says that for speaking out against gay marriage in the past, he has been attacked as a homophobe and Uncle Tom, despite a long history of championing gay rights.
He strongly believes that civil partnerships - introduced in 2005 to give same-sex couples equal legal rights - are enough.
"We've got marriage, it's called a civil partnership and I rejoice in the fact that people like me who are different from straight people can do something they can't. I relish that."
He thinks there are more gay people in agreement with him than people may think - at a dinner party he hosted for 11 gay friends, only one was in favour of marriage, one was undecided and the rest were against, he says.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22758434
/debate
I think these people should get more vocal, as their opinions certainly count. Peer pressure etc. may cause many of them to stay quiet, but it's no good forcing ideals on people. It may just be that a huge portion of gay people are against gay marriage themselves.
(edited 10 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
Yes, they have a right to voice their opinions, but I am sure there were many women who did not want the right to vote and preferred the status quo.
Just because they are gay does not make their opinions any more valid, just as a woman in the early 20th century protesting against giving women the vote did not have a more valid opinion than, say, a liberal male who was pro giving women the vote.
Just because they are gay does not make their opinions any more valid, just as a woman in the early 20th century protesting against giving women the vote did not have a more valid opinion than, say, a liberal male who was pro giving women the vote.
'huge proportion' is just silly.. - as someone who spends most of their time in LGBT circles, doing things with the community etc - its a minority, and a very small one, that disagrees.
Ofcourse they should have all the right to voice these opinions, and be safe doing so - but to suggest its anything more then a small minority has no backing or reasoning at all..
Ofcourse they should have all the right to voice these opinions, and be safe doing so - but to suggest its anything more then a small minority has no backing or reasoning at all..
So what? There are straight people who dont agree with standard marriage...
Well they're not giving good reasons as arguments.
Hahaha, this is like those Jews who disagree with Israel. You can't just find a minority within a group who agree with your opinion and start claiming that their voices should be heard when all you really care about is the fact that your views align. I mean, I'm sure whites could find a couple of uncle toms and who don't mind slavery and use it as an argument as granting blacks freedom.
Original post by Al-Mudaari
/debate
I think these people should get more vocal, as their opinions certainly count. Peer pressure etc. may cause many of them to stay quiet, but it's no good forcing ideals on people. It may just be that a huge portion of gay people are against gay marriage themselves.
I think these people should get more vocal, as their opinions certainly count. Peer pressure etc. may cause many of them to stay quiet, but it's no good forcing ideals on people. It may just be that a huge portion of gay people are against gay marriage themselves.
That's fine if they don't agree with gay marriage. They don't have to get married. Problem solved.
I'm sure there are a lot of gay people who are really not bothered about getting married whether they are allowed to do it or not (just as plenty of straight people are not bothered about it). But just because they don't want it, I don't see why you should deny it to people who do.
Original post by Psyk
That's fine if they don't agree with gay marriage. They don't have to get married. Problem solved.
I'm sure there are a lot of gay people who are really not bothered about getting married whether they are allowed to do it or not (just as plenty of straight people are not bothered about it). But just because they don't want it, I don't see why you should deny it to people who do.
I'm sure there are a lot of gay people who are really not bothered about getting married whether they are allowed to do it or not (just as plenty of straight people are not bothered about it). But just because they don't want it, I don't see why you should deny it to people who do.
Speaking of which, is this whole gay marriage thing going up for vote, ie. democracy? Or is it too late.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Al-Mudaari
Speaking of which, is this whole gay marriage thing going up for vote, ie. democracy? Or is it too late.
Minority rights should not be subject to the will of the mob.
Original post by Olenna Tyrell
Minority rights should not be subject to the will of the mob.
Well that is what democracy means...
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Al-Mudaari
Speaking of which, is this whole gay marriage thing going up for vote, ie. democracy? Or is it too late.
In a representative democracy, Parliament has the right to legislate on our behalf in the interests of the nation. As long as there are regular democratic elections to this body, then the fact that every single bill isn't voted on by everyone doesn't indicate the total absence of democratic values.
But even if it were to go to a nationwide vote, then it would still probably pass. It is supported by a clear majority (not just a majority, but an absolute majority) of voters.
Source: http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/05/20/voters-back-same-sex-marriage/
Original post by Eloquai
In a representative democracy, Parliament has the right to legislate on our behalf in the interests of the nation. As long as there are regular democratic elections to this body, then the fact that every single bill isn't voted on by everyone doesn't indicate the total absence of democratic values.
But even if it were to go to a nationwide vote, then it would still probably pass. It is supported by a clear majority (not just a majority, but an absolute majority) of voters.
Source: http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/05/20/voters-back-same-sex-marriage/
But even if it were to go to a nationwide vote, then it would still probably pass. It is supported by a clear majority (not just a majority, but an absolute majority) of voters.
Source: http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/05/20/voters-back-same-sex-marriage/
Yeah, my point was merely that in a democracy the majority opinion is the one that matters. Whether that opinion be in an election, giving the government a mandate to legislate, or in a referendum.
Obviously mobocracy is avoided somewhat due to the representative side of our democracy but still...
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Al-Mudaari
Speaking of which, is this whole gay marriage thing going up for vote, ie. democracy? Or is it too late.
We don't have a system of direct democracy, referendums are only used quite rarely, and so far have only been used for major government reforms (devolution, membership of the EU, changes to the voting system). It doesn't seem appropriate to put this to a referendum because it's not something that affects everyone.
Original post by Skip_Snip
Some gay people don't approve of gay marriage. Some muslim don't approve of terrorism.
Not comparing gay marriage to terrorism, just attitudes toward
Not comparing gay marriage to terrorism, just attitudes toward
What's that supposed to mean?
Original post by Oyks
What's that supposed to mean?
It means that you can't assume the stereotype is true for everyone.
Original post by Skip_Snip
Some gay people don't approve of gay marriage. Some muslim don't approve of terrorism.
Not comparing gay marriage to terrorism, just attitudes toward
Not comparing gay marriage to terrorism, just attitudes toward
Gay people who don't approve of same-sex marriage are a minority. Muslims who "don't approve of terrorism" are a majority, not just "some", as you well know. I think you could have used a better comparison.
So apparently some gay folks don't approve of gay marriage. How does that affect the debate in any way shape or form? The proposal isn't to force all gay couples into marriage, just as straight marriage doesn't force itself onto everyone. The proposal is to allow gay couples the same basic marriage rights as straight people (i.e., remove a blatant injustice), to give them a choice.
So to say that as some gay folks don't agree with gay marriage, and therefore it's not an issue is farcical. Their arguments about it being a religious institution as also invalid, it's clearly not. The current proposal is regarding marriage in a state context (although IMO it should be forced onto the religious type to), and that state context doesn't involve the church at all. State marriage is conducted at the registry office, not the church, and so is entirely separate from the church, therefore we shouldn't let religious ideas influence our progression as a supposedly secular society.
Their argument that marriage is purely for the raising of children is also flawed. Would you let infertile straight couple marry? Why? They can't procreate children 'naturally', but they can adopt. But then why would you refuse a gay couple marriage, unless there's an underlying prejudice.
At the end of the day, just as marriage isn't forced on straight couples, it wouldn't be forced on gay couples. They'd be able to chose to marry or not, but it's vital that we give them the same choice a straight couple. Any less than this is clear cut discrimination.
So to say that as some gay folks don't agree with gay marriage, and therefore it's not an issue is farcical. Their arguments about it being a religious institution as also invalid, it's clearly not. The current proposal is regarding marriage in a state context (although IMO it should be forced onto the religious type to), and that state context doesn't involve the church at all. State marriage is conducted at the registry office, not the church, and so is entirely separate from the church, therefore we shouldn't let religious ideas influence our progression as a supposedly secular society.
Their argument that marriage is purely for the raising of children is also flawed. Would you let infertile straight couple marry? Why? They can't procreate children 'naturally', but they can adopt. But then why would you refuse a gay couple marriage, unless there's an underlying prejudice.
At the end of the day, just as marriage isn't forced on straight couples, it wouldn't be forced on gay couples. They'd be able to chose to marry or not, but it's vital that we give them the same choice a straight couple. Any less than this is clear cut discrimination.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Im gay but a christian
- Loughborough University LGBTQ+
- Being gay at Loughborough University
- Being black (Somali), gay and Muslim
- gay/bi muslims
- closeted gay muslim AMA
- Queer Muslim female
- What is it like as a bisexual guy at University?
- What is it like as a bisexual guy at University?
- Gay relationships in sixth form/college
- Why dont women do it??
- Is it weird to be 23 and single?
- Husband has never been physically intimate with me
- I don’t feel attractive in clubs
- Why is religion against sex?
- Flatmate is gay, I am Muslim. I want him to know I have no problem with his sexuality
- Confused about my sexuality after break-up
- Intrusive thoughts.
- LGBT+ Chat XIII
- people think I am gay
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
