Questions About Marriage

Why marriage, and why now?

When the Massachusetts Supreme Court struck down discriminatory marriage laws last November, right-wing opponents moved quickly to write their anti-gay biases into the U.S. Constitution. They proposed the first constitutional amendment in U.S. history that would actually take away minority rights. That would be a big mistake, but the religious right is spending millions of dollars to push for this amendment. Restricting marriage is their top priority for 2004.

That means marriage will be a major public issue, whether we like it or not. We can either be involved or be ignored. That's why the Coalition is leading an education campaign to tell the truth about marriage.

What is the Federal Marriage Amendment?

The Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) is a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that was introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) and five co-sponsors last year (H.J. Res. 56). The amendment was later introduced in the Senate by Senator Wayne Allard (R-CO) and four co-sponsors (S.J. Res. 26). The amendment would deny marriage rights for same-sex couples.

We strongly oppose this amendment. Amending the Constitution is rare. The Constitution was amended to include the Bill of Rights in 1789 and has only been amended 17 times since, usually to protect the rights and liberties of the people. The Constitution was amended to abolish slavery, to give women the right to vote, and to give young adults the right to vote. The Constitution has never been amended to discriminate against a group of people.

Does this constitutional amendment have a chance at passing?

It's hard to tell in an election year. Opponents of the amendment make two valid points: (1) the Constitution has never been amended to discriminate, and (2) this issue is better left to the states. Nevertheless, right-wing forces plan to use the marriage issue during the 2004 election campaign to suppress black voter turnout.

What is "gay marriage"?

"Gay marriage" is a misleading term we try to avoid. We're not looking for a new kind of marriage; we simply want the right to marry the people we love, which would include the 1,049 benefits given in marriage. That's why we use the term "marriage equality."

Why is marriage important to gays and lesbians?

In 1997, the U.S. General Accounting Office listed 1,049 rights and benefits pertaining to marriage. Without the right to marry, gays and lesbians are denied those basic rights.

A same-sex couple could live together, share bank accounts, raise children together and operate as a married couple and then lose all their rights in an instant. If a partner is suddenly hospitalized, the other partner may have no legal right to visit if they're not married. If one partner dies, the other partner may have no right to survivor benefits or insurance benefits. They must pay federal income taxes on their employer’s contribution to their domestic partner’s health insurance, while married employees do not have to pay for their spouses. If a gay or lesbian couple has children, the second parent is not legally recognized by law and can be denied Social Security for a surviving child.

What if I don't want to get married?

That's fine too. Marriage is not for everyone. But for those who do want to get married, they should have that right.

Is marriage a civil rights issue?

Absolutely. Martin Luther King Jr. said "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." In 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that marriage is a fundamental human right. Before that ruling, several states refused to allow interracial couples to marry. But the Supreme Court said "the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State."

Why do they keep comparing "gay rights" to "civil rights"?

The civil rights movement is not exactly the same as the struggle for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights. However, there are some similarities. Both groups are fighting for basic laws against discrimination. And both groups have met with resistance from right-wing opponents who want to preserve the inequities in the law.

Several of the key black civil rights leaders were also gay, lesbian or bisexual. Bayard Rustin, a black gay man, was one of Dr. King's closest advisers. Rustin organized the pivotal 1963 March on Washington, where King delivered his famous "I Have A Dream" speech. Other key black LGBT figures from the civil rights era include author and activist James Baldwin and playwright Lorraine Hansberry, author of "A Raisin In The Sun."

Are gays and lesbians really oppressed?

In many states, gays and lesbians can still be fired from their jobs or not hired for jobs because of their sexual orientation. They can be denied housing or other rights simply because they are gay. And the worst part is that they have no legal recourse under U.S. law. Currently, no federal law prohibits employment or housing discrimination against gays and lesbians.

Black gays and lesbians are particularly at risk. Last May, 15-year-old Sakia Gunn was murdered in Newark, New Jersey because she was gay. In December 2002, 21-year-old Gregory Beauchamp was murdered in Cincinnati because he was gay. Earlier that year, a black college student in Atlanta was nearly beaten to death by a classmate who thought he was gay.

But gays haven't suffered the same as blacks did, have they?

No two groups experience prejudice exactly the same way. Women and blacks are not the same either, but our laws still protect women from discrimination. Latinos, Native Americans and people with disabilities have all experienced different types of prejudice from that experience by African Americans, but our laws protect those groups as well. It doesn't matter if two groups are identically oppressed; what matters is that no group should be oppressed.

How does this affect churches and religion?

Allowing gays and lesbians to marry will not affect religion at all. There's a big difference between "religious marriage" and "civil marriage."  Religious marriage usually takes place at a place of worship and is performed by a member of the clergy. Civil marriage is authorized by the state or county and can be performed by a government official. Civil marriage does not affect churches or religions. In fact, the Massachusetts ruling stipulates that no religious institution will be required by the government to marry a couple. With civil marriage, religious institutions would still be free to set their own rules for marriage. Government, on the other hand, would not be able to discriminate based on gender or sexual orientation. Our campaign is solely focused on civil marriage.

What's the difference between "civil unions" and marriage?

Civil unions are laws passed by a few states and municipalities that provide many, but not all, of the benefits of marriage to gay, lesbian or unmarried couples. While civil unions are a step in the right direction, they are not a solution to the inequality in marriage laws. Unlike marriage rights, civil unions are not transferable from state to state. If you get married in Massachusetts, for example, you could still lose all your rights if you move to Florida. That's why we support civil marriage, not civil unions.

Shouldn't marriage be sacred?

Couples, not the government, should decide how to make their marriage vows sacred. Denying gays and lesbians the right to marry actually undermines the sanctity of marriage by exposing the inconsistencies in the law. If two heterosexual strangers meet at a bar tonight and get married tomorrow, they would instantly have more legal rights than a gay or lesbian couple who have lived together and loved each other for 30 years. That's not fair, and it's not sacred.

But isn't marriage about children?

For some people it is, but many LGBT people are also parents. Some are raising their own children. Others are raising children in their family. Some raise adopted children or foster children. It's not fair to penalize the children by depriving their parents of basic human rights.

And although raising children is a noble undertaking, marriage has never been reserved exclusively for child bearing. Many heterosexual couples are not able to have children or choose not to have children, but they can still partake of all the rights of marriage. Many older couples have passed their child bearing years, but they too have the right to marry. Raising children is, and should be, a personal choice, not a government-dictated responsibility.

Will black leaders support marriage rights for gays and lesbians?

Many black leaders already have. Marriage supporters include civil rights activist Coretta Scott King, former Senator and Ambassador Carol Moseley Braun, Rev. Al Sharpton, Rep. John Lewis, Rev. James Forbes and Rev. William Sinkford. And the list is growing everyday!

We hope to work with the NAACP, Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Urban League, Congressional Black Caucus and Leadership Conference on Civil Rights on this issue as well. Most of these groups have been very supportive of other civil rights issues affecting gays and lesbians.

Why should black people support black LGBT people on marriage?

As African Americans, we know first hand the experience of discrimination and what discrimination has done to our country. The civil rights movement fought for basic rights in a society that wanted to keep us as second-class citizens. It would be wrong for us to turn our backs on another group in need and to participate in discrimination based on sexual orientation. Gays and lesbians want many of the same things everyone else does: healthy lives, stable families and secure relationships.

Aren't there other important issues for blacks to deal with?

There are many important issues facing our community. We care about jobs, health care, education and other concerns. Marriage discrimination is an important issue, but it is not the only one. We encourage community activists to be involved with whatever issues are important to them.