All I want for Christmas is Equality

I know it is an impossible dream but my ideal Christmas gift would be full equality under the law in the United States. It is something that I don’t have, and some people for religious, prejudicial, and political reasons want to make sure I don’t ever get. The Administration is in trouble, and it looks like sexual minorities will once again become scapegoats in an attempt to win an election by flaming biases and building on people’s prejudices that have no basis in fact.

A joint resolution has been presented to both the Senate and House called the "Federal Marriage Amendment." The resolution calls for an amendment to the constitution that reads; "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups." This is simply a thinly veiled attack on people who are in no way a danger to society or marriage as an institution. It is the government’s attempt at persecution of a minority population. And the same bigots who put forth this nonsense usually claim that America is a Christian nation—for shame.

People should have the same rights regardless of whether they are attracted to the same sex or the opposite sex. This isn’t true regarding our federal government right now, but a few states and localities have made some provisions for same-sex unions without calling them marriage. Other countries, like Canada, are moving toward full and equal recognition of same sex unions.

I really don’t care what our unions are called. I certainly hope that sexual minorities are smart enough to not pattern our relationships after the failed marriages of heterosexuals. Congress passed a law last year that said one state did not have to recognize the same-sex unions of another state, but that doesn’t appear to be good enough. I think Thomas Jefferson would turn over in his grave at this blatant attack on state rights.

The most dangerous part of this bill is not in its definition of marriage; it is that it forbids the government at any level from giving "legal incidents" to couples regardless of what the union is called. In other words, we can’t get married because we’re gay and because we’re gay we can’t have any type of union that will provide us with legal benefits. One of the proponents of the bill, John Hostettler (R-IN) claims that this last section of the bill that outlaws all same-sex unions is to "preserve scarce government resources" in a paper published on his House web site. In other words, homosexual couples should support the government more than heterosexual couples in order to save the government money.

I know a lot of gay and lesbian people who really don’t care about the "marriage" issue. They think it’s too conservative and compromises with society. That’s fine, but this bill not only makes it illegal for same-sex couples to marry, it directly denies same sex couples any rights or privileges that states may want to give through civil unions or some other means. It could even be interpreted to mean that we can’t even put our partner on an insurance form as our "spouse." Maybe even that we can’t give medical power of attorney, or rights at the time a partner dies. The bigots are scared, and they have a political machine willing to take advantage of their fears in order to keep power. As a result, same sex unions are in jeopardy whether we are married or not.

Obviously there is no such thing in the United States of America as what our Constitution calls, "equal protection under the law" when it comes to people who happen to love someone of the same sex.